RAHUL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rakesh Dubey, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Pandit S.P. Sharma, learned counsel assisted by Smt. Archana Maurya, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Sri Vijay Kumar Mishra, learned AGA for the State - respondent and perused the record.

(2.) Here are the brief facts of this case : Anjali Gupta, the daughter of Shiv Narayan Umar Vaish, a resident of 1450, Sanjay Gandhi Nagar Police Station-Hanumant Vihar, Naubasta District, Kanpur, lodged a First Information Report (for short "F.I.R.") against the present revisionist. It has been alleged that her marriage with the revisionist, Rahul, was fixed and was due to take place on December 13, 2023. On August 1, 2023, family members from both sides met to fix the date of engagement and marriage. Both sides agreed that the bride's family would deliver Rs.4.00 lakh cash and other articles to the groom's family. The engagement was fixed for 20/11/2023. However, Rahul somehow obtained Anjali's mobile number and began talking to her before their marriage ceremony. Later, he called her at one Hotel Kanha Dham in Kanpur on three different dates and compelled her to drink alcohol against her wishes. Despite her refusal, he also made physical relations on the pretext of their fixed marriage.

(3.) Before the engagement ceremony, cash and other items, as agreed upon earlier, were delivered to the groom's family. However, Rahul's behaviour changed abruptly after receiving the agreed upon items. During phone calls, Rahul began abusing Anjali's parents and threatened to cancel the marriage. Afraid of public shame, Anjali didn't inform her parents about the unfolding events. On December 11, 2023, Rahul called Anjali over mobile phone and refused to marry her. When she informed her parents about it, they filed a written complaint in the police station where a compromise between the parties was arrived and it was agreed that each party will return each others money and other items and consequently the dispute was resolved. To avoid ignominy, Anjali kept the fact of her physical relationship with Rahul a secret. Despite the parties settling their dispute after police intervention, Rahul continued to threaten her by circulating objectionable photos on social media and sending defamatory messages from a fake Instagram ID. An application of the said facts was moved by the informant and consequently, an F.I.R., bearing Case Crime No. 15 of 2024 was lodged against the revisionist Rahul and his family members under Ss. 328, 376, 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'Penal Code'), and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act of 1961').