SAKET SHARMA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs in this petition:

(2.) The facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioner is that the respondent No. 2 lodged a complaint to the Police Inspector, Mahila Thana Sector-6, Bhilai, District Durg, later on changed to Sec. -6 Police Station, Bhilai with the title ???? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? which is a part of charge-sheet. The sum and substance of the complaint is that the petitioner promised to respondent No.2 that he will marry her but the respondent No.2 has not agreed as there was caste difference but the petitioner has allegedly convinced her that he will take care and for that purpose, even he is ready to leave his parental home and looking into dedication and caring, the respondent No.2 agreed and they started living together. However, when the petitioner was promoted and posted at Balaghat (MP), he has refused to marry the respondent No.2 and started misbehaving using abusive language and also insulted her in the name of her caste as she belonged to Scheduled Caste (for short, SC). For this reason, the respondent No.2 has desired that reasonable be action taken to get her justice. It appears that the said police station has received the complaint on 2/5/2018, however, no action has been taken by the said police station and thereafter the matter has been transferred, for the reasons best known to the respondent State authorities, to the police station AJAK/Crime, Kanker. It appears that Deputy Superintendent of Police concerned has written a letter of the Superintendent of Police and sought leave for registration of the case vide letter dtd. 19/9/2018 as on that date the Deputy Superintendent of Police has found that the complainant has submitted in support of her version 'love letters' written to her on her birthday and a compact disc consisting of obscene videos and screen shots of the messages exchanged in between them in Whatsapp. The Deputy Superintendent of Police has found that the petitioner and respondent No.2 were known to each other being co-employees but no evidence was there showing intimate relationship between them. Further in categorical terms it has been said that as respondent No.2 is saying that the petitioner has duped the respondent No.2 by giving her impression or making her as wife and since the respondent No.2 belonged to scheduled caste, therefore, the provisions of Sec. 3 (2) (v) of Act of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the Act of 1989) is also attracted. After the inter-departmental correspondence, reluctantly the police has registered FIR No. 329/18 dtd. 2/10/2018, however, at that point of time, the police found that it is true that in between the petitioner and respondent No.2 being co-employees posted at the same place and office, official talks were held but they both were aware that their parents are in search of bride or bridegroom for them and there is no question of marriage between them as the respondent No.2 herself agreed that she has lodged a false report etc. Letter dtd. 2/6/2018 written by the office of the Additional Superintendent of Police to the office of Superintendent of Police, Durg also finds place in the charge sheet. Since the FIR has been registered and further investigation has been made and during the course of investigation, the police have found that respondent No.2 is originally resident of Vardha (MS) and in that region, their caste is treated as Scheduled Caste and on that basis, for the said reason specifically mentioning that respondent No.2 belongs to Mahar caste in that region and caste certificate is issued on the basis of earlier certificate of District Magistrate. Chandur (MS).

(3.) In the charge sheet, the evidence which has been filed showing intimate relationship is alleged Whatsapp chatting between the petitioner and respondent No. 2. However, the chatting between them will make it clear that atleast the respondent No.2 is involved with two other persons one namely Amit Kumar and other namely Binay Kumar and it is respondent No.2 who used to write or invite for fulfillment of her sexual desire and for that purpose, sent a book namely '50 shades of grey with the remark 'Happy Birthday Sir'. There are various shortcomings in the said correspondences particularly it appears that respondent No.2 has made interpolation in chats. and deliberately deleted all those chats from her side which are incriminating or against the interest of respondent No.2, but the fact remains that whatever chats are placed in the charge sheet show active participation of the respondent No.2.