Case Title: Girinath B And State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.6863 OF 2022 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.6485 OF 2022
Date of Order: 28-07-2023
CORAM: HON’BLE JUSTICE M NAGAPRASANNA
INTRODUCTION
The Karnataka High Court recently noted that the gradual decline of closeness following six years of consensual sexual activities should not be interpreted as meeting the criteria for Section 375 (Rape) of the Indian Penal Code.
FACTS
The petitioner, Girinath B, approached the court with a plea to dismiss two cases initiated against him in Bengaluru, based on allegations under sections 417 and 420 of the IPC. Additionally, there were parallel proceedings in Davangere, pertaining to charges under sections 376(2)(n), 506, 504, 323, 114, 417 r/w 34 of the IPC, all arising from the same set of circumstances.
The petitioner’s argument centered around his assertion that he had connected with the complainant on Facebook and they had been in a cohabitation arrangement for a period of 6 years until 2019. He contended that the complainant fabricated a narrative, falsely claiming that she had been subjected to physical exploitation throughout the entirety of the six-year period, based on a promise of marriage.
COURT’S ANALYSIS
The court reviewed the records and observed that there are two instances of criminal charges based on similar facts, with a slight variation involving an alleged incident dated April 16, 2021.
With reference to the charge sheets filed in both cases, the court remarked that the petitioner is facing two sets of charges. One set pertains to offenses under Sections 417 and 420 of the IPC, while the other set relates to offenses under Sections 376(2)(n), 323, 417, 506, and other offenses against the petitioner’s parents. These charges revolve around a 6-year-long live-in relationship between the petitioner and the complainant.
The court cautioned that allowing further legal proceedings based on the consensual acts between the complainant and the petitioner could potentially amount to an abuse of the legal process. This is because the duration of the relationship is crucial in determining the applicability of Section 375 of the IPC.
Furthermore, the court took note of the petitioner’s argument that the complainant has a history of filing false complaints against various individuals. It cited an example involving another individual named Dhanush, who faced similar charges from the complainant and was subsequently acquitted when she changed her testimony.
In light of this, the court concluded that it can be inferred from previous orders that the complainant had alleged sexual intercourse based on the promise of marriage. The timing of the allegation is significant, particularly during the period when she was in a live-in relationship with the petitioner. The court highlighted a prior case in which the complainant had filed a complaint against Dhanush for physical relationship in 2013.
The court characterized this situation as a typical scenario where the complainant engages in relationships through social media platforms and later files criminal complaints against the same individuals using identical allegations.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Shreya Sharma
