Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"In the present case, if the charge sheet is analyzed in the light of above said case laws, it is found prima facie case is made out against the accused persons. Under the provisions as submitted by the Add. P.P. In the case statement of prosecutrix (on the basis of which FIR has been registered)and her statement recorded u/s 164 CrPC. The prosecutrix has categorically stated that her husband has abandoned her since the year 2009 and w.e.f. 13.01.2011 she developed friendship with the accused and on 20.10.2011 the accused took her to Kedrnath from Delhi and repeatedly committed rape with her on the false pretext of marriage without her consent and against her will and thereafter he took her to Mathura, Vrindavan, Haridwar and Agra and again committed rape with her. She has also stated that the accused had committed rape with her. She has also stated against accused Suresh Mishra and Manju Mishra, who are parents of accused Pranav Mishra that they threatened to defend and kill her. Thus it is clear that prima-facie case for the offences punishable u/s 366/376/376(2)(n)/506 IPC against accused Pranav Mishra and u/s 506/34 IPC against accused Suresh Mishra and Manju Mishra is made out. However, there is no allegation for the offences punishable u/s 366/376 IPC against accused Suresh Mishra and ManjuMishra.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2022/DHC/005659

8. In the present case, the petitioners were charged under Sections 506 and 34 of the IPC. The basic constituent of an offence under Section 506 of IPC is to punish a person for the offence of criminal intimidation, which lays down the cases where threat to death or grievous hurt be caused. Section 506 IPC reads as under:

18. The petitioners who are parents of the main accused already stand discharged under Sections 366 and 376 of IPC. There are only orders to frame charges against them is only under Section 506 of IPC.

19. Section 506 IPC is divided into 2 categories which are lesser and graver forms of criminal intimidation. The main requirement of the offence is threatening of the victim and the intention is an important aspect of the offence.

22. In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above as well as considering ambit of Section 506 of IPC only expressing sympathy and later on not being able to help a person does not attract ingredients of Section 506 of IPC. It is not clear from the definition of Section 506 of IPC that the immediate purpose of criminal intimidation is to induce a person threatened to do pause alarm to that person or to pause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or omit to do any act which he was legally entitled to do as a means of avoiding the execution of such threat or further that such threat consisted of some injury to the complainant his reputation or property or injury to the person's reputation or property of someone the complainant was interested in. In the present case, none of these ingredients were present even on perusal of the entire material placed before the learned Trial Court. Thus, in view of the fore-going discussion, the case under Section 506 of IPC is held not to be made out against the petitioner.