SC Stays Further Proceedings In 'Sextortion' Case Against Ex-Army Officer; ASG To Verify If Prosecutrix Has Filed Six Rape Cases Against Different Persons

Walia, in his Special Leave Petition (SLP), has highlighted that over the past eight years, the complainant had caused registration of seven FIRs against nine different individuals, including the petitioner, across seven police stations.

The petitioner argues that seven FIRs were filed by the complainant against multiple individuals over eight years, all allegedly as part of a "sextortion racket" aimed at extorting money. Among the respondents, the complainant purportedly filed similar complaints against nine individuals in cases across seven police stations since 2014. The petitioner, who claims no criminal record, maintains that he has fallen victim to these repeated false allegations and that the complainant has demonstrated a pattern of forum shopping for law enforcement support.

The petition detailed that Captain Walia, a decorated 63-year-old Army veteran with significant health issues, had become acquainted with the complainant during the COVID-19 lockdown. The complainant had approached him, presenting herself as a social media influencer offering promotional services for his book "Broken Crayons Can Still Colour." Walia claimed to have engaged her services in June 2021 for book promotion.

However, according to Walia’s petition, on December 29, 2021, after meeting her to discuss the promotion strategy and dropping her off, he received a call from the Noida Police. The complainant alleged he had drugged and assaulted her around 4:15 p.m. the same day. The Delhi High Court previously dismissed Walia’s plea to quash the chargesheet, citing that the matter should be addressed before the trial court.

The petitioner’s counsel highlighted discrepancies in the complainant's account, including contradictions between her initial report and later statements under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, discrepancies in medical reports, and inconsistencies in her claim of being intoxicated. Furthermore, they argue that the complainant declined medical examinations, refused to submit her clothes for forensic analysis, and did not provide evidence of her location at the time of the alleged incident. The police filed a “no-arrest” charge sheet after observing that the allegations lacked corroborative evidence and forensic backing.

The petitioner cites the Supreme Court rulings in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal and Mohammed Ali vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, where it was held that criminal proceedings based on uncorroborated testimonies should be scrutinized for mala fides. The petitioner’s counsel also argues that the Delhi High Court failed to apply the relevant provisions under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and prevent alleged misuse of legal processes, calling for the quashing of both the FIR and the charge sheet against him.

Proceedings Before Delhi High Court

Pertinently, the Delhi High Court, in its order dated July 31, had ordered, "It is not the case that the investigation or the proceedings before the learned Trial Court have been delayed. In view of the above, this Court does not consider it appropriate to entertain the present petition. The learned Trial Court is directed to consider the arguments on charge expeditiously and to pass an order after considering the arguments raised by the petitioner in the present petition. Needless to say, the petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court in case any grievance remains. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms."

Cause Title: Rakesh Walia v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. [SLP(Crl) No. 014850/2024]