Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Times of India
The Times of India
National
TNN

SC quashes rape FIR against man who broke promise of marriage

MUMBAI: Observing that a man and woman had chosen to be in a consensual relationship for a "considerable time" of at least two years, the Supreme Court quashed a 2016 first information report (FIR) of rape saying its registration was an "abuse of the criminal process.'' The woman had alleged that the relationship was based on an assurance of marriage.

The SC said its views were underpinned by a 2019 ruling which made a distinction "between a false promise of marriage which is given on understanding by the maker that it will be broken and a breach of promise which is made in good faith but not fulfilled."

The SC said the two "were undisputedly in a consensual relationship from 2009 to 2011" or till 2013 as stated by the (woman) who said the consent was granted on "an assurance (from the accused) of marriage." She had filed the FIR in 2016 three years after the relationship ended, noted the SC. The FIR was for offe-nce of rape under the Indian Penal Code and for cheating.

The HC had dismissed the man's quashing petition and he thus went to the SC in appeal in 2022. The SC, after hea-ring their lawyers, said, "We find ex facie the registration of FIR in the present case is abuse of the criminal process.''

"The parties chose to have physical relationship without marriage for a considerable period of time. For some reason, the parties fell apart. It can happen both before or after marriage. Thereafter also three years passed when respondent No 2 (woman) decided to register a FIR. The facts are so glaring as set out aforesaid by us that we have no hesitation in quashing the FIR dated 16.12.2016 and bringing the proceedings to a close," the Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh said in a July 27 decision.

The SC pointed to an earlier ruling in 2019 by the apex court in a case in which the complainant was aware that there existed obstacles in marrying the accused and still continued to engage in sexual relations; the Supreme Court had quashed that FIR.

In the present case too, while quashing the FIR, the SC said "Permitting further proceedings under the FIR would amount to harassment to the appellant through the criminal process itself."

(The victim's identity has not been revealed to protect her privacy as per Supreme court directives on cases related to sexual assault)

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.