Lack of Evidence of Coercion: Allahabad High Court Quashes Rape Case Against Government Official, Cites Consensual Relationship
By Rajesh Pandey
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has dismissed criminal proceedings, including a chargesheet, against a government official accused of repeatedly raping a woman.
The court found that the allegations of a long-term forceful sexual relationship, purportedly maintained under the threat of leaking obscene videos, were not substantiated and appeared to be legally unsustainable.
The judgment was delivered on February 16 by Justice Avnish Saxena while presiding over a petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
The petition, submitted by the primary accused, Neeraj Kumar, and a co-accused, sought to quash the chargesheet and the subsequent cognizance order dated February 28, 2025.
The Allegations
The case originated from a First Information Report (FIR) lodged on December 1, 2024, by the woman. According to the FIR, the complainant is a married woman whose husband is serving in the Indian Army.
She stated that during her preparation for the Provincial Civil Service (PCS) examinations, she befriended a woman named Mamta.
It was through this acquaintance that she was introduced to Mamta’s brother, the first applicant, Neeraj Kumar.
The complainant alleged that on August 7, 2022, Neeraj Kumar invited her to the Rajrani Hotel on Pilibhit Bypass Road in Bareilly under the pretense of celebrating his birthday.
She claimed that at the hotel, he forcibly raped her and recorded indecent videos and photographs of the act.
She further alleged that he subsequently threatened to make these videos viral, a threat that compelled her to submit to his demands on multiple subsequent occasions.
According to the FIR, this included another instance of rape at the same hotel on August 14, 2022, and another on October 27, 2022.
The complainant also alleged a similar incident occurred at the Radisson Hotel in Bareilly on November 18, 2023.
The FIR further claimed that on May 19, 2024, the accused threatened her again via phone.
It was also alleged that the first accused shared the explicit videos and photos with his cousin brother, the second applicant, who then used them to threaten and blackmail the complainant for sexual favors.
When she refused, the second applicant allegedly circulated the material among her family members, causing her immense distress and driving her to contemplate suicide.
Court’s Scrutiny and Observations
Upon a thorough examination of the case record, including the statements made by the victim herself, Justice Saxena found critical inconsistencies that undermined the prosecution’s case.
The court focused on the nature of the alleged acts, questioning whether they were the result of force or consent.
A key point of contention was the victim’s claim of being constantly under the fear of her videos being made viral, despite her own admission that she had never actually seen any such video on the date of the first alleged incident (August 7, 2022).
The court found it difficult to accept that a married woman would continuously submit to sexual intercourse at various hotels over an extended period based solely on a threat involving videos she had never seen, especially against a public servant.
Furthermore, the judgment highlighted a crucial detail from the FIR: the complainant and the accused had first come into contact in 2017.
The court noted that a bare perusal of the FIR revealed they had established a relationship and had met on multiple occasions at various locations, including parks and their respective homes, between 2017 and 2019.
“This factual matrix suggests that the victim was a consenting party to the relationship,” the court observed.
“Her consent cannot be said to have been obtained under the fear of harm to her children or through blackmail with indecent videos and photographs, given the long-standing nature of their association.”
Ruling on the Co-Accused
Regarding the second accused, the cousin brother, the court found a complete absence of evidence.
It noted that there was no material on record to suggest that he had ever transmitted any video or photo of the victim or used such material to blackmail her.
Consequently, the court concluded that the criminal proceedings against both applicants were an abuse of the process of law.
It held that the allegations, even if taken at face value, did not prima facie constitute the offense of rape, which requires proof of a lack of consent.
Quashing the entire proceedings, including the chargesheet and the cognizance order, the court ruled in favor of the applicants.
AllahabadHighCourt #RapeCaseQuashed #Consent #CriminalLaw #BNSS #Judgment #LegalNews #UttarPradesh #Section528BNSS #FalseAllegations
