Justice Girish Kathpalia, Delhi High Court 

The Delhi High Court noted that a disturbing trend is setting in where complainants increasingly resort to levelling grave allegations of rape and sexual misconduct against their in-laws solely to coerce them into paying hefty settlement amounts.

The Court said that ever since the Supreme Court delivered the judgment in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar & Anr (2014), which narrowed down the abuse of provisions under Section 498A/406 IPC as regards arrest, this trend has been prevalent. 

The Bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia observed, "I also find substance in the submission of learned Senior Counsel for petitioners that in the recent past, ever since the Supreme Court delivered the judgment in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar & Anr., (2014) 8 SCC 273, which narrowed down the abuse of provisions under Section 498A/406 IPC as regards arrest, a trend is setting in where the complainants have started alleging such serious charges of rape, molestation and similar other sexual misconduct only to ensure that the in-laws of the complainant are compelled to settle the matrimonial disputes by paying hefty amounts."

Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra appeared for the Petitioner, while APP Hemant Mehla appeared for the State.

The petitioners approached the High Court by way of a criminal main case seeking the quashing of a First Information Report (FIR) registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar. The impugned FIR was lodged for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 376, 354A, 506, 509, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, involving allegations of matrimonial cruelty, criminal breach of trust, criminal intimidation, and serious sexual misconduct.

The petitioners no. 1 and 2 stood in the capacity of brothers-in-law to the de facto complainant. The matrimonial alliance between the de facto complainant and the brother of petitioner no. 1 was solemnized, out of which two children were born. Subsequently, a matrimonial rift ensued, leading the husband to institute divorce proceedings against the de facto complainant.

The petitioners contended that the impugned FIR constituted a gross abuse of the process of law, having been orchestrated purely out of vengeance following the institution of the divorce case by the husband. It was further urged that the de facto complainant did not level any allegations of rape or sexual assault in the initial FIR, but subsequently introduced a highly belated and improvised accusation of rape in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The defence asserted that the de facto complainant failed to offer any plausible explanation or whiff of justification for remaining silent over the alleged sexual misconduct for several years, thereby rendering the prosecution's case highly suspect.

The court noted that complainants had increasingly resorted to levelling grave and severe allegations of rape, molestation, and sexual misconduct against in-laws as a tool of leverage to coerce settlements and extract hefty amounts during matrimonial disputes.

Consequently, the court issued notice to the de facto complainant through the Investigating Officer and directed the State to file its status report.

In order to prevent the abuse, the court directed that the ongoing proceedings before the trial court should remain stayed until the next date of hearing.

Cause Title: Vikram Kumar Jha v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr. [CRL.M.C. 4734/2026]

Appearances:

Petitioner: Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra, Advocate Ansuiya, Advocate Shivaansh Maini

Respondents: APP Hemant Mehla

Click here to read/download the Order

Tags: