NEW DELHI: Delhi High Court has imposed a cost of Rs 25,000 on a man for seeking registration of a fake rape case against his wife’s cousin, alleging that he had raped his wife. These allegations were denied by his wife.
The single judge bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta dismissed the petition stating that it was without merit.
“The wheels of the criminal justice system cannot be permitted to be clogged by frivolous complaints wherein the victim herself does not have a grievance but the same is maliciously filed on her behalf. This may be an agonising way of harassment not only for the spouse but for a person who may be innocently framed and prosecuted,” said the court.
The husband had challenged two orders passed by a Metropolitan Magistrate (MM) court and a sessions court, refusing to direct registration of an FIR against the cousin by exercising powers under Section 156(3) of the CrPC.
The husband claimed that the MM court as well as the sessions court misdirected themselves by not directing the registration of FIR.
The HC bench noted that the police submitted in theAction Taken Report that the wife did not have any grievances and had denied the incident of rape.
The court said that just because information was allegedly disclosed by the wife regarding the commission of an offence to the husband, it cannot give rise to a cause of action when she herself had categorically denied any such offence having been committed by her cousin.
The husband mentioned in his complaint that his wife had disclosed after a few days of the marriage that she was raped by her cousin and that her mother had threatened her not to disclose it to anyone.
However, the wife refuted the claim before the trial court, adding that her husband was harassing her physically and for dowry too. She also told the court that proceedings regarding domestic violence, maintenance and divorce were pending between the parties.
The single judge bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta dismissed the petition stating that it was without merit.
“The wheels of the criminal justice system cannot be permitted to be clogged by frivolous complaints wherein the victim herself does not have a grievance but the same is maliciously filed on her behalf. This may be an agonising way of harassment not only for the spouse but for a person who may be innocently framed and prosecuted,” said the court.
The husband had challenged two orders passed by a Metropolitan Magistrate (MM) court and a sessions court, refusing to direct registration of an FIR against the cousin by exercising powers under Section 156(3) of the CrPC.
The husband claimed that the MM court as well as the sessions court misdirected themselves by not directing the registration of FIR.
The HC bench noted that the police submitted in theAction Taken Report that the wife did not have any grievances and had denied the incident of rape.
The court said that just because information was allegedly disclosed by the wife regarding the commission of an offence to the husband, it cannot give rise to a cause of action when she herself had categorically denied any such offence having been committed by her cousin.
The husband mentioned in his complaint that his wife had disclosed after a few days of the marriage that she was raped by her cousin and that her mother had threatened her not to disclose it to anyone.
However, the wife refuted the claim before the trial court, adding that her husband was harassing her physically and for dowry too. She also told the court that proceedings regarding domestic violence, maintenance and divorce were pending between the parties.
