HIMANSHU SINGLA Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Sec. 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [hereafter 'BNSS'] on behalf of the petitioner, seeking setting aside of the order on charge dtd. 12/12/2024 [hereafter 'impugned order'] passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (FISC)(RC), Dwarka Courts, Delhi [hereafter 'Sessions Court'], whereby charge under Sec. 64(2)(m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [hereafter 'BNS'] was framed against the petitioner, in Sessions Case No. 771/2024, arising out of FIR No. 295/2024, registered at Police Station Mohan Garden, Delhi, under Ss. 376/506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter 'IPC'].

(2.) Briefly stated, the present FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the prosecutrix on 2/9/2024, wherein she alleged that she had got married to one Karan in the year 2016. She claimed that her husband used to beat her, and she had later obtained a divorce from him on 4/6/2024. She further stated that in February 2024, she had come in contact with the accused (petitioner herein) online, and they had started chatting. Subsequently, they had met in Krishna Nagar. On the afternoon of 28/5/2024, the accused had called her to his flat at Mohan Garden, Delhi, where he had established sexual relations with her on the pretext of marriage. Thereafter, they had met at the same flat on multiple occasions, and the accused had continued to establish physical relations with her under the assurance of marriage. She alleged that she had been unaware of the accused's marital status and had only discovered the same later when she had checked his mobile phone. Upon confrontation, the accused had apologized and had promised to leave his wife and marry the prosecutrix. In July 2024, the accused had allegedly assured the prosecutrix that he would live with both her and his legally wedded wife. Following this, the prosecutrix had stopped communicating with him. However, they had again engaged in physical relations on 19/8/2024/20/8/2024 at the same flat, during which the accused had once again promised to divorce his wife. Subsequently, the accused's wife had allegedly called and threatened the prosecutrix against taking any legal action against her husband. The prosecutrix thus alleged that the accused had engaged in sexual intercourse with her on multiple occasions on the false promise of marriage.

(3.) The medical examination of the prosecutrix was conducted on 2/9/2024, and her statement under Sec. 183 of BNSS was recorded on 3/9/2024. In her medical examination, the prosecutrix had reiterated her allegations and, in addition, had informed the concerned doctor that the accused had engaged in oral and anal sexual intercourse with her on three to four occasions forcibly, without her consent. Similar allegations had also been made in the statement recorded under Sec. 183 of BNSS. The petitioner herein was arrested in this case on 7/9/2024.