Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by Prashant against the State of NCT of Delhi, challenging the Delhi High Court's order dated 16.10.2023 that refused to quash FIR No. 272 of 2019 registered under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC. The complainant alleged that the appellant had a forceful sexual relationship with her on false promise of marriage and threatened her. However, the Court noted that the parties first met in 2017 and had a prolonged relationship, meeting multiple times at various places. The complainant did not stop meeting the appellant or file a complaint during the relationship. The Court found it inconceivable that the complainant would continue the relationship without voluntary consent. The MLC report and statement under Section 164 CrPC contained inconsistencies. The Court observed that both parties were educated adults and later married other persons in 2019 and 2020 respectively. Applying the parameters from State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal, the Court held that the allegations did not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences, particularly as there was no initial promise of marriage. The criminal proceedings were quashed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 CrPC - Parameters for quashing - The court applied the principles from State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, holding that where allegations even if taken at face value do not constitute an offence, or where proceedings are maliciously instituted with ulterior motive, quashing is warranted (Paras 11-12). B) Indian Penal Code - Rape - Section 376(2)(n) IPC - Repeated rape - Consensual relationship - The court held that where the parties were in a prolonged consensual relationship without any initial promise of marriage, the essential ingredients of rape under Section 376(2)(n) are absent. The complainant's conduct of continuing to meet the appellant and not filing a complaint during the relationship indicated voluntary consent (Paras 17-19). C) Indian Penal Code - Criminal Intimidation - Section 506 IPC - Absence of threat - The court found that the allegations of threat were not substantiated and the relationship was consensual, thus the offence of criminal intimidation was not made out (Paras 14, 19).
Issue of Consideration
Whether FIR No. 272 of 2019 dated 29.09.2019 lodged against the appellant under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC should be quashed.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned order of the High Court dated 16.10.2023 set aside. FIR No. 272 of 2019 dated 29.09.2019 registered at Police Station South Rohini, Delhi under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC and all consequential proceedings quashed.
Law Points
- Quashing of FIR
- Consensual relationship
- Absence of promise of marriage
- Section 482 CrPC
- Section 376(2)(n) IPC
- Section 506 IPC
- Bhajan Lal parameters
