Delhi HC sets aside order for FIR against BJP leader Shahnawaz Hussain, brother

The Delhi High Court has set aside a trial court order for registration of an FIR against BJP leader Shahnawaz Hussain and his brother over several alleged offences including rape and directed that the matter be considered afresh by the lower court.

Justice Amit Mahajan said the trial court should have given the suspects an opportunity to present their case before rejecting a magisterial court’s order refusing to direct registration of an FIR. The impugned judgment dated 31.05.2022 is set aside. The Criminal Revision No. 254/2018 is restored and is remanded back to the concerned court for a decision afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, said the high court in a recent order on a plea by the two brothers.

Also read: FIR registration in rape case: Delhi HC dismisses Shahnawaz Hussain’s petition

In the present case, the complainant, who claimed to be running an NGO, alleged she was raped by Shahbaz Hussain and later Shahnawaz Hussain asked her not to highlight the matter. The complainant claimed that although Shahbaz Hussain promised to marry her, she subsequently found he was already married.

It was also alleged that the complainant was pressurised to eat beef and change her religion and that nikah was performed between the parties. Later, Shahbaz Hussain pronounced ‘talaq, talaq, talaq’ and ran away from the spot. She claimed Shahnawaz Hussain, a former union minister, conspired with Shahbaz and supported his brother in commission of the offences.

The magisterial court had refused to order registration of an FIR on the basis of the woman’s complaint, saying it did not disclose commission of a cognisable offence. However, the trial court, in a revision plea, ordered the SHO of Mandir Marg police station to register an FIR under Sections 420, 376, 295A, 493 and 496 of the IPC. It also directed slapping Sections 506, 509, 511 and 120B of the IPC.

Also read: SC stays operation of HC order on lodging FIR against BJP leader Shahnawaz Hussain in rape case

Before the high court, the counsel for the petitioners argued that the allegations did not disclose commission of any cognisable offence and no notice was issued to them by the trial court while hearing a challenge to the magisterial court order.

It was said that if an order of the magistrate rejecting the application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code is assailed by way of a revision petition, the trial court should not upset the order without giving an opportunity to the party in whose favour the order under revision was passed.

The high court said some rights accrue either in favour of or against the parties once the magisterial court passes an order on a plea seeking registration of an FIR and such rights cannot be taken away in a challenge without there being issuance of any notice or an opportunity of hearing to the party whose right is sought to be taken away.

(With Agency inputs)