NEW DELHI: Two years prior to the nationwide ‘Me Too’ movement, a Muslim woman in 2016 had lodged an
FIR
at a police station in Assam accusing a Hindu man of sexually assaulting her in 1982 when she was a minor and cited birth of a male child in 1983 to corroborate the rape, a charge sent for trial by a
Kamrup
district court and Gauhati HC refusing to quash the FIR.
The beleaguered man, who had provided for his son born from the “consensual relationship”, moved
Supreme Court
questioning the filing of FIR after 34 years of the alleged incident. A bench of Justices B R
Gavai
and
Sandeep Mehta
said though Constitution courts can quash FIRs only in rare cases, it found that the case deserved to be dismissed.
Writing the judgment, Justice Gavai said, “We find lodging a case after 34 years, and that too on the basis of a bald statement that the woman was a minor at the time of commission of offence, could itself be a ground to quash the proceedings.”
“No explanation whatsoever is given in the FIR as to why the woman kept silent for a long period of 34 years. The material on record shows the relationship was consensual, inasmuch as the son who is born out of the said relationship has been treated by the man as his son and all the facilities, including cash money, have been provided to him,” Justice Gavai said, quashing the FIR.
Police had probed the complaint and unearthed a story of greed. “Due to greed for property of the Hindu man, his son with the aid of his mother lodged this FIR after 34 years. Due to the dispute over property between the man and his son, the case was lodged,” police said.
English (US) ·