Court dismisses application to quash proceedings, citing prima facie evidence against the accused.
In a significant judgment delivered on March 18, 2026, the Allahabad High Court rejected an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the proceedings in a case involving severe allegations of rape, blackmail, and misuse of exorcism practices. The case, titled Rohit Upadhyay v. State of U.P., revolves around accusations against Rohit Upadhyay, who is alleged to have repeatedly raped and blackmailed the victim, a married woman, under the guise of exorcism.
Presided over by Justice Avnish Saxena, the court meticulously examined the contents of the First Information Report (FIR) and statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the CrPC. The victim alleged that she was lured to the accused's residence under the pretense of treating her two-year-old son. She was given 'Prasad' containing a stupefying substance, which rendered her unconscious. Upon regaining consciousness, she found herself partially disrobed, and the accused allegedly threatened to release indecent videos and photographs to blackmail her into submission.
The accused's counsel argued that the charges were fabricated due to familial enmity and suggested that the relationship between the accused and the victim was consensual. Furthermore, they claimed that the FIR was lodged belatedly and exaggerated. However, the court found these assertions unconvincing, noting that the possession of indecent videos and photographs was corroborated by supplementary affidavits submitted by the accused himself.
The prosecution, represented by learned AGA Reena Gupta, countered the defense's claims by emphasizing the accused's exploitation of his position as an exorcist to perpetrate the crimes. Additionally, they highlighted the accused's attempts to blackmail the victim even after she relocated to Orissa to be with her husband.
Justice Saxena underscored the scope and ambit of Section 482 CrPC, noting its use in preventing abuse of legal processes and ensuring justice. However, the court clarified that such powers are reserved for the rarest of rare cases, which the present case did not qualify as. The judgment referenced several precedents, including Kurukshetra University v. State of Haryana and Som Mittal v. Government of Karnataka, to reinforce the judicial stance.
Ultimately, the court ruled that the allegations constituted a prima facie case warranting trial, thereby dismissing the application to quash the proceedings. This judgment serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in safeguarding victims' rights and ensuring accountability for heinous crimes.
Bottom Line:
Application under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings of a case involving allegations of repeated rape, blackmail, and misuse of exorcism practices dismissed by the court, holding that prima facie case exists against the accused/applicant.
Statutory provision(s): Section 482 CrPC, Sections 506, 376, 384 IPC, Sections 161 and 164 CrPC
Rohit Upadhyay v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2868106
