AMAN MALIK Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal misc. application is filed by the petitioner/accused under Sec. 528 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short, B.N.S.S.) for quashing of charge-sheet dtd. 1/4/2024, cognizance/summoning order dtd. 2/4/2024 and the entire proceedings of Session Trial No.47 of 2024 'State vs. Aman Malik @ Naved Ali' for the offences punishable under Ss. 328, 376, 506 of IPC and Sec. 3(1) and 5(1) of Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018, P.S. Mukhani, District Nainital pending in the court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

(2.) Before proceeding to consider the merits of the compounding application, this Court deems it appropriate to set out the brief facts of the case, which are as follows:- Criminal proceedings were initiated on the basis of an FIR No.25/2024 lodged by respondent no.2/complainant at P.S. Mukhani, District Nainital. As per the allegations made in the FIR, petitioner/accused befriended the respondent no.2/complainant by introducing himself as Aman, thereby concealing his true identity as a Muslim; that, thereafter, petitioner/accused invited respondent no.2/complainant at his residence on the occasion of Janmashtami celebration in his house and taking advantage of the fact that she was observing a fast on the occasion of Janmashtami, petitioner/accused gave her milk laced with some sedative; that, when she came under the influence of the sedative, petitioner/accused raped her and took her nude photographs; that, when she regained her senses petitioner/accused showed her nude photographs and videos and threatened her to make her nude photographs and videos viral and to remain in relationship with him; that, due to fear of defamation, respondent no.2/complainant initially succumbed to the threats of petitioner/accused, however, subsequently, a woman named Sonam Khan contacted the respondent no.2/complainant and informed her that petitioner/accused is her husband and advised her to stay away from him; that, on this respondent no.2/complainant questioned Sonam Khan, pointing out that she (Sonam Khan) is a Muslim and then how she could be in a relationship with the petitioner/accused, who had introduced himself to the respondent no.2/complainant as a Hindu; that, Sonam Khan then clarified to the respondent no.2/complainant that the petitioner/accused is, in fact, not a Hindu but a Muslim. After completion of investigation, Charge-sheet was filed on 1/4/2024 whereupon cognizance was taken and summoning order dtd. 2/4/2024 was issued to the petitioner/accused.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused would submit that from the very inception of their acquaintance, respondent no.2/complainant was fully aware that the petitioner/accused belonged to the Muslim community and he never concealed his real identity. It is further submitted that both the parties reside in the same vicinity and the respondent no.2/complainant used to frequently visit the petitioner's residence.