Punjab-Haryana High Court
Xxxxxxxxxxxx vs Xxxxxxxxxxxx on 13 March, 2026
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M)
Date of Reserved: 24.02.2026
Date of Pronouncement: 13.03.2026
Shweta Patil ....Appellant.
Versus
State of Haryana and another ...Respondents.
***
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR
.......
Argued by: Ms. Simsi Dhir Malhotra, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel)
for the appellant.
Mr. Yuvraj Shandilya, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Jasdev Singh Brar, Advocate
for respondent No.2(through video conferencing).
***
Sukhvinder Kaur, J.
1. Appellant/ prosecutrix has preferred the instant appeal against judgment dated 06.08.2019, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Gurugram, vide which respondent No.2/ accused Jashandeep Singh has been acquitted.
2. The present FIR was registered on the basis of statement of complainant/ prosecutrix with the allegations that she was 32 years old and was resident of Pune, however, she was presently living in Gurugram. Around two years ago, she had met accused Jashandeep Singh in Pune. They started meeting each other. She disclosed about her marital status to KOMAL him and also told him that she was having seven years old son. She had not 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 2 legally separated from her husband but she was living separately from her husband for the last three years. She was still not divorced from her husband, but accused married her in Arya Samaj Mandir and since 16.8.2015, they were living together in Gurugram. Initially, accused had established physical relations with her by force. He had used to raise hand on her child and had repeatedly threatened to kill her. He had earlier left her after taking her important papers and she had got registered zero FIR in P.S Sadar, Gurugram against accused under Sections 376 /384/ 506/ 379/ 323/ 313/ 354 IPC. Before legal action could be taken, accused and his family members apologized to her and performed sagun ceremony by taking her to their village. They promised to solemnize her marriage with accused according to customary rites and ceremonies after she would withdraw her application/complaint. Thereafter, accused married her of his free will, but as soon as it was confirmed that she had taken back her case, he again started beating her and made her to give him money every month. He used to have forcible sexual intercourse with her against her wish and without her consent. He had saved her naked photos and that of her son in his mobile phone and when she asked him to delete the photos, he beat her mercilessly. He threatened to upload their naked photos on Internet. He also told the landlord to oust her and her son from the house. In this manner, accused had sexual intercourse with her many a times by force and had taken money from her under threat. He deserted her and took away her important papers as well as gold jewellery. He gave beatings to her son and also put him in fear. After performing marriage in Arya Samaj Mandir, Ghaziabad, she and accused had lived together as husband and wife. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint of complainant/ prosecutrix, formal FIR KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 3 was registered. The prosecutrix was taken to General Hospital, Gurugram for medico-legal examination, however, she refused for medical examination. Statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was got recorded. On the basis thereof, offence under Sections 406/ 376(2)(n) IPC were added. Rough site plan was prepared. The accused was arrested from Airport, Amritsar, Punjab and was joined in the investigation. Pursuant to disclosure statement of the accused memo of demarcation Ex. P9 was prepared at the scene of crime of rape in Gurugram. After that, the accused was got medico-legally examined at General Hospital, Gurugram. Statements of the witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C were recorded. After completion of other investigation, challan against the accused person was presented in the court, for judicial verdict.
3. After finding a prima facie case against the accused, he was charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 323 and 506 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as 10 witnesses.
PW1 complainant/ prosecutrix reiterated the allegations as levelled in her complaint made to the police.
PW2 Constable Bhateri remained associated with SI Raj Bala, Investigating Officer, during the investigation in this case.
PW3 Constable Krishna Kumar also remained associated with SI Raj Bala, Investigating Officer, during the investigation in this case.
PW4 Dr. Tony, Medical Officer, General Hospital, Gurugram deposed that he medico legally examined the accused and he was of the opinion that there was nothing abnormal suggestive of that the patient could KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 4 not perform sexual intercourse.
PW5 Dharampal, Draftsman, prepared scaled site plan Ex.P11 after visiting the place of occurrence.
PW6-Contable Om Parkash, deposed that he took the case property comprising of blood sample of accused, which he delivered at FSL, Madhuban in intact condition, but the same was returned to him by FSL Division by raising objection regarding non availablity of case property of the prosecutrix.
PW7 Constable Sunil Kumar, deposed that he took the case property comprising of underwear of accused which he deposited at RFSL, Bhondsi in intact condition and tendered in evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.PW7/A. PW8 L/ Inspector Kailash, deposed that he submitted charge sheet under Section 173 Cr.P.C. after completion of investigation.
PW9 HC Manju testified all the articles of case property, which she got delivered at FRSL, Bhondsi and FSL Madhuban in intact condition and tendered in evidence her duly sworn affidavit Ex.P9.
PW10 SI Raj Bala, the investigating officer, deposed regarding various investigation proceedings conducted by her in the present case.
5. Statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which, all incriminating evidence was put to him, which he denied and pleaded innocence and false implication. However, no defence evidence was led by the accused.
6. After considering the evidence on record, learned trial Court found the same to be woefully insufficient to convict the accused who was accordingly acquitted of the offences for which he had been charge-sheeted, KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 5 vide impugned judgment dated 06.08.2019.
7. Aggrieved of the said decision, present appeal has been filed by the appellant/ complainant challenging acquittal of the accused/ respondent No.2.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the trial Court has failed to consider that the prosecutrix proved that any kind of relationship be it physical or otherwise was forced upon her by respondent No.2 under the threat to viral her objectionable photographs and also threatening the prosecutrix to eliminate her and her son. The trial Court erred in doubting the credibility of testimony of the prosecutrix and ignored the well settled law that conviction can be founded on the testimony of the prosecutrix alone since evidence of prosecutrix is more reliable than that of an injured witness, unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroboration. The minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies in the statement of the prosecutrix should not be the ground for discarding her otherwise reliable testimony. The reasoning given by the trial Court to disbelieve the prosecutrix is perverse and unlogical and state of mind of prosecutrix could not be precisely analyzed on the basis of speculation because each person reacts differently to a particular stressful situation. He argued that the prosecutrix though an educated lady was startled by threatening of respondent No.2 and finding no alternative at that time bowed to the unscrupulous demands of respondent No.2 as the photographs could have caused hardship in the marital life of the prosecutrix, who was already having strained relationship with her husband and it could have caused irreparable damage to her reputation. He urged that the trial Court committed an error in concluding that the prosecutrix was a consenting KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 6 party by mistaking/ confusing the submission of the appellant with her consent and mere act of submission does not involve consent. Submission of body under the fear or terror cannot be construed as the consented sexual act. If appellant was well acquainted with respondent No.2, it does not in any manner mean that the appellant gave her consent and instead she failed to detect the ulterior motives of respondent No.2 and had been lured into his trap. The trial Court gave undue weightage to certain photographs, affidavit, marriage certificate and the wedding photographs placed on record by respondent No.2 which have not been properly proved and cannot be relied upon. He submitted that the prosecutrix remained consistent in her stand and her credibility could not be shaken even during her lengthy cross- examination. He thus prayed that this appeal be accepted, judgment dated 06.08.2019 be set aside and accused be convicted for the offences as charged with and be punished accordingly.
9. After having heard learned counsel for the appellant at length and having perused the impugned judgment as well as other relevant record, we are of the considered opinion that prosecution in the instant matter was unable to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
10. As per the prosecution version the accused repeatedly committed rape upon the prosecutrix against her will and without her consent and she could not be said to be a consenting party to the sexual relationship with the accused, as accused had sexual relationship with the prosecutrix for two years after he had promised to look after her and her child, but then he went back on his words and had beaten and threatened the prosecutrix and her son throughout.
11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uday Vs. State of Karnatka KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 7 2003(2) R.C.R. (Crimina) page 99 SC, held as under:-
"It therefore appears that the consensus of judicial opinion is in favour of the view that the consent given by the prosecutrix to sexual intercourse with a person with whom she is deeply in love on a promise that he would marry her on a later date, cannot be said to be given under a misconception of fact. A false promise is not a fact within the meaning of the Code. We are inclined to agree with this view, but we must add that there is no strait jacket formula for determining whether consent given by the prosecutrix to sexual intercourse is voluntary, or whether it is given under a misconception of fact. In the ultimate analysis, the tests laid down by the Courts provide at best guidance to the judicial mind while considering a question of consent, but the Court must, in each case, consider the evidence before it and the surrounding circumstances, before reaching a conclusion, because each case has its own peculiar facts which may have a bearing on the question whether the consent was voluntary, or was given under a misconception of fact. It must also weigh the evidence keeping in view the fact that the burden is on the prosecution to prove each and every ingredient of the offence, absence of consent being one of them."
12. From conjoint reading of Section 375 IPC and Section 90 IPC and ratio of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case supra it emerges that each case is to be scrutinized in view of the facts and circumstances of the each case, so as to reach at the conclusion as to whether the consent given by the prosecutrix was given out of free will or the same was a consent given under 'misconception of facts or otherwise' as envisaged under Section 90 IPC.
13. The fulcrum of the prosecution case rests upon the version of the prosecutrix and she is the most material witness of the prosecution. The KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 8 prosecutrix stepped into the witness box as PW1. During her examination- in-chief she testified as per the prosecution version while stating on oath that accused had allured her to his house sometime in May/ June 2015, when they were both living in Pune, on the pretext of friendly meeting but he committed rape upon her by administering some intoxicant substance in cold drink to her. During that incident, he clicked her objectionable photographs from his mobile phone and during the period subsequent thereto, he subjected her to repeated sexual intercourse under threat and blackmail for around one year after compelling her to shift to Gurugram, where he himself shifted in August 2015. On 09.06.2017, he inserted his private part into her mouth by force, committed sodomy against her and also committed rape upon her by repeating the earlier threats.
14. However her testimony was shattered during her cross- examination. After scrutinizing the cross-examination of the prosecutrix, the trial Court has rightly observed that the version of the prosecutrix does not appear to be believable and she is not a reliable witness. During her cross- examination when she was confronted with her statement Ex.P2, which was the basis for registration of FIR, it came to fore that the prosecutrix had made vast improvements in her testimony in the Court with regard to the dates and allegations of sexual assault under the threat of uploading her alleged objectionable photos on social media and under threat of eliminating the son of the prosecutrix. The perusal of her statement Ex.P2 made before the police reveals that she alleged therein that she became more than friendly with the accused with her consent and she shifted to Gurugram along with her child to live with him. In Ex.P2 she specifically alleged that for the last two years, she was in sexual relationship with the accused; that KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 9 at that time, she was living separately from her husband for the last three years though they were not legally divorced; that she and accused were living together in Gurugram since 16.08.2015; that accused got married with her in Arya Samaj Mandir, Gaziabad and, thereafter, they had resided as husband and wife; that after she withdrew her previous case got registered under Sections 376/ 377 etc. against the accused on the apology tendered by the accused and his family members, she was taken by the accused to his village where shagun ceremony was performed by the family of the accused.
15. While appearing as PW1 the prosecutrix stated that she was allured to his house by the accused in Pune some time in May/ June 2015 and was raped after rendering her unconscious with some intoxicant substance. She stated that she did not raise any hue and cry after regaining her senses and remained absolutely silent after returning home due to threat of blackmail of accused, who had threatened her to viral her objectionable photographs clicked during the alleged sexual act. The prosecutrix also alleged that in the year 2015 itself, accused had e-mailed her objectionable photographs to her but no such photographs were produced before the police. The conduct of the prosecutrix in not confiding anything to her family (parents and married sister who were residing in Pune) and to her husband and not informing the police, goes a long way to prove that she had voluntarily gone to he house of the accused and had sexual relations with him out of her free will.
16. Trial Court has rightly observed that the version of the prosecutrix that she was forcibly taken away from Pune and compelled to accompany the accused to Gurugram on 16.08.2015 is also highly KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 10 improbable. During her cross-examination the prosecutrix stated that she had informed her husband about her new address of Malibu Town in Gurugram where she had shifted in August 2016. She admitted that she did not disclose to her husband that this house was being occupied by her and accused jointly and that the said house had been taken on lease in the name of the accused. She admitted that she used to leave her child unattended in her house at Pune whenever the accused asked her to come and meet him outside the house. She further admitted it to be correct that she had again left his son unattended with a maid in her house at Ghaziabad in the year 2017, despite having knowledge that her husband was soon going to Banglore in connection with his job work. Her husband had already left on 01.06.2017, when she had come to Gurugram on asking of accused and she did not tell her husband or her maid on or before that day that she was leaving her house of Ghaziabad to go and reside with accused at Gurugram under his compulsion. She categorically admitted it to be correct that at no point of time till the last period, she disclosed anything to her husband, her relatives, her parents and her in-laws about her alleged sexual exploitation to which she was subjected to by the accused for around two years despite the fact that she had cordial relationship with her parents and her married sister and was regularly visiting them.
17. During her cross-examination, she admitted that she gave an affidavit dated 27.02.2017 Ex.D1, bearing her signatures, before Pune police in connection with her previous complaint against the accused, admitting in the said affidavit that her friendship with the accused converted into love and they established physical relationship with mutual consent, hence when the accused got transferred to Gurugram, she along with her son KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 11 came to live with the accused due to love and that she gave complaint against him because of some misunderstanding, however, the accused had apologized to her for altercation and they were going to marry in near future with the blessings of his family, who had already performed the ceremony of shagun by giving customary ornaments and other gifts. She admitted the police proceedings/ restatement dated 26.02.2017 Ex.D2 bearing her signatures and admitted before Pune police that accused had committed act of sexual intercourse with her free consent and he had never committed any act of sexual intercourse against her will nor he had taken any video recording while indulging in sexual intercourse with her, since mother of accused was sick, therefore, engagement ceremony had already been performed between them and it was decided that their marriage would be performed after her divorce from her husband. She admitted that MOU dated 3/4.12.2015 Ex.D3 bearing her signatures and herein also it was mutually settled between her and the accused that they would marry each other in simple manner with their free consent. The prosecutrix admitted that Ex.D8 was application for registration of marriage whereas Ex.D4 was their joint affidavit in respect of their proposed marriage, both of these documents bore her photographs and that of accused which were clicked in the office of Sub Registrar, Ghaziabad and both these documents was bearing their signatures as well. She admitted that Ex.D5 was their marriage certificate dated 04.12.2015 having their photographs and signatures and Ex.D6 was their marriage photographs clicked at Ghaziabad in which she and accused were seen wearing garlands.
18. She further stated in her cross-examination that on 04.12.2015, she and accused were jointly living in their rented house, when in the KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 12 morning hours, he offered her a cup of tea and after drinking the same, she was semi unconscious and in that state accused took her in a cab to some place in Ghaziabad, where he got her signatures on 3-4 papers which were already written and she was not in a condition to read these papers, hence she simply signed these on his asking. The prosecutrix remained silent to the Court query as to "where that photo was clicked and was she was under
some dizziness and as to what was the ceremony that had been shown in the photograph". Thereafter, she replied that it appeared to be a marriage photograph and in that photograph she seemed to be under dizziness, but the trial Court made the specific observation that in photograph Ex.D6 the accused and the prosecutrix were seen exchanging garlands and with smiling faces they were looking into the camera when the photographs were clicked, which falsifies the statement of the prosecutrix that the said photo was clicked when she was under some dizziness.
19. Trial Court has rightly observed that there are number of circumstances on the record which reveals that the prosecutrix voluntarily and willingly shifted to Gurugram and resided with accused under one roof of her own volition. It emerges from her testimony that she was well acquainted with the accused since before her estranged husband went abroad and they used to meet each other frequently and were on visiting terms. The prosecutrix was a mature educated lady and it is not believable that under the alleged threat she blindly obeyed the dictates of accused and followed him to Gurugram, without disclosing anything to her family members and husband and without even slightest of resistance. Rather from the evidence on record it transpires, that she was living in live-in- relationship with the accused in joint house and remained in intimacy with KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 13 him for considerable long period of two years. She even met the parents and other family members of the accused when she went to his village and even the shagun ceremony was performed at that time. She was well aware of the fact that she was a married woman and had not taken any step to get divorce from her husband till then and she admitted that she was in the knowledge that she could not have married the accused till she had taken divorce from her husband, but even then she got married with the accused in Arya Samaj Mandir. Trial Court has rightly observed that this conduct of the prosecutrix in accompanying the accused to Arya Samaj Mandir in Ghaziabad, exchanging the floral garlands and posing for the joint photograph were quite significant to show that she was a consenting party.
20. The prosecutrix admitted that her her residents had been in a well guarded society and a guard was always present at the main gate of the society and there were other residences surroundings her accommodation. She admitted that society of Malibu Town was a big society with independent plots/ houses and a large number of people were living there, but strange enough at no point of time she lodged any protest with anyone that she was being kept forcibly or had been forcibly taken away by the accused, rather as admitted by her during her cross-examination, she did not disclose anything to any person, even to her parents and other family members. Earlier also, the prosecutrix gave complaint in the police against the accused on similar set of allegations, but then she gave affidavit to the police that she and accused were living together and having sexual relations with mutual consent. This conduct of the prosecutrix clearly speaks that she was not under any threat and being blackmailed as alleged. As already observed that the prosecutrix was a mature woman of 30-35 years and was KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 14 graduate and well versed with the ways of life and thus she was well in the position to distinguish her good or bad. She left her house twice, firstly in Pune and secondly in Ghaziabad to live with the accused at Gurugram. Trial Court has rightly held that if she remained with accused, while still legally married to another man, for considerable length of period, allowed him to have sexual intercourse with her without any demur and obeyed his dictates,it could certainly be said that she voluntarily consented to the sexual relation and she was not deceived or induced by the accused to satisfy his sexual urges.
21. The prosecutrix stated that on 09.06.2017, when she tried to snatch the mobile phone of the accused on seeing her some impropriate photographs allegedly clicked by the accused, he beat her, forcibly committed rape as well as sodomy with her and dragged her from third floor to first floor by pulling her from hair. Trial Court has rightly observed that in the dead hours of night, when even a slight noise is audible, but strangly enough this action of the accused did not attract any of the neighbourer or any inhabitant of the locality. At no point of time the prosecutrix tried to escape from the accused. She did not raise any alarm when accused was sexually assaulting her and when she was being forcibly dragged by the accused from third floor to first floor. Nothing has been produced on record that she took medical treatment after returning to her house in Ghaziabad. Otherwise also, when as per medical evidence she was a well built woman she could not have been over powered in that manner. Moreover, as per MLR Ex.P11 of the prosecutrix, no force was used against her.
22. Trial Court has again rightly observed that under these facts and circumstances it is highly improbable that the prosecutrix would leave KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 15 her house in Ghazibad again, on the oral threat of accused to cause harm to her son if she would not accompany him to Gurugram and without taking anyone in her confidence she left her child, her husband and her house and came to Gurugram to live with accused.
23. In the given facts and circumstances of the present case, it can be fairly inferred that the prosecutrix was not under any misconception of facts and was in a consensual relationship with the accused out of her free volition. Testimony of the prosecutrix does not inspire confidence and case of the prosecution has not been proved beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt against the accused. The evidence on record is indeed not sufficient to convict the accused of the offence as charged with and he has been rightly acquitted by learned trial Court.
24. It is well settled that judgment of acquittal should not be interfered with lightly. In the case of Sadhu Saran Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2016 (2) RCR (Criminal) 319, the Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated that generally an appeal against acquittal has always been altogether on a different pedestal from that of an appeal against the conviction. It was held that in an appeal against acquittal, where the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is reinforced, the Appellate Court would interfere with the order of acquittal only when there was perversity of fact and law.
25. Learned counsel for the appellant was unable to point out any illegality, infirmity or perversity in the impugned decision dated 06.08.2019 which calls for interference.
26. In view of the above, the appeal being bereft of any merit is dismissed with impugned judgment dated 06.08.2019 passed by learned trial KOMAL 2026.03.13 17:10 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRA-AD-803-2019 (O&M) 16 Court being upheld.
27. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(SUKHVINDER KAUR) (ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE JUDGE
13.03.2026.
Komal
Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/ No
Whether reportable? : Yes/ No
KOMAL
2026.03.13 17:10
I attest to the accuracy
of this document