NEELESH MASIH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) The necessary facts for the disposal of the present petition in short are that the petitioner came to know after reading from the newspaper that the prosecutrix has made a report against him for offence under Section 376 of IPC in Police Station Inderganj, District Gwalior. It is submitted in the petition that according to the prosecution case, the friendship had developed between the prosecutrix and the petitioner through Facebook and the petitioner projected himself to be an unmarried person and promise was made by the petitioner that he would marry the prosecutrix. It is alleged that she was subjected to physical relations on various occasions. When the petitioner stopped communicating with the prosecutrix, then she went to Itarsi to the house of the petitioner where she was maltreated by the petitioner and his mother and was openly threatened that he would not marry the prosecutrix and he would kill the prosecutrix.

(3.) It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that in fact it was the prosecutrix who was approaching the petitioner and was pressurizing him to marry her and when the petitioner disclosed that he is already married and his divorce petition is pending and unless and until the divorce petition is decided, he cannot marry her, then the prosecutrix had threaten the petitioner that she would lodge a false case for offence under Section 354 of IPC. Under the name of helping the orphan children, the prosecutrix had taken Rs.5,000/- - 5,000/- on several occasions and since the petitioner had also lost his father, therefore, he knew the plight of an orphan person and out of the friendship, he had paid Rs.5,000/- to the prosecutrix but when the petitioner came to know that in fact the amount which is being paid by him is not meant for orphan people but in fact it is being used by the prosecutrix, then he stopped making payment of the same. When the petitioner expressed that he would not be able to marry her because of the pendency of the divorce petition, then the prosecutrix threatened the petitioner on mobile to falsely implicate him and his mother in a case under Section 354 of IPC. It is submitted that under these circumstances, a false report under Section 376 (2)(n) and 506 of the IPC has been made against the petitioner. It is further submitted that since the free and fair investigation is the fundamental right of the accused, therefore, he had made the recorded conversation available to the police but nothing is being done by the police in this regard and, therefore, the direction has been sought for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to make free and fair investigation on the representation made by the petitioner which is filed as Annexure P-1.