New Delhi [India]: A Delhi Court has recently discharged an accused in a rape case, ruling that the evidence, particularly WhatsApp chats exchanged before and after the alleged incident, contradicted the prosecution’s claims.
The case involved allegations of forceful sexual assault made by the complainant, who had been in a consensual relationship with the accused after a marriage proposal was made through a mutual relative.
Advocate Shashank Dewan, representing the accused, submitted that the complainant (prosecutrix) and the accused had been in a consensual sexual relationship, with no commitment to marriage. He further argued that the WhatsApp chats exchanged between the two disproved the allegations of assault, showing no indication of the incident as claimed.
Advocate Dewan contended that the FIR was falsely filed by the complainant to pressure the accused into marriage. Additionally, he pointed out the significant and unexplained delay in the registration of the FIR, which further cast doubt on the veracity of the allegations.
The incident was said to have occurred in November 2020 when the two were returning from shopping. The complainant claimed that the accused assaulted her in a parked car, but filed the case only in April 2021–five months after the alleged incident–raising concerns about the delayed reporting, the court noted.
A key factor in the Court’s decision to discharge the accused was the analysis of WhatsApp messages between the complainant and the accused. These messages contradicted the allegations, revealing that the accused had already declined the complainant’s marriage proposal and that the complainant had initiated several meetings with him.
The chats from the day of the alleged assault showed cordial relations and no sign of the claimed assault.
Additionally, the complainant admitted to the authenticity of the chats but refused to provide her phone for forensic examination.
The Court concluded that the evidence failed to raise significant suspicion about the accused’s involvement in the crime.
The delay in filing the FIR, along with the absence of supporting evidence for the complainant’s claims, led the Court to rule that the circumstances of the alleged sexual assault were highly improbable, resulting in the discharge of the accused.