Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Rajesh Sankarsan Tripathy, filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashment of FIR No. 195/2017 and the resultant Sessions Case No. 333/2019 pending before the Sessions Judge at Dindoshi, Mumbai. The FIR was lodged by respondent No. 2 (the first informant) alleging offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 377, 417, 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The first informant claimed that she got acquainted with the applicant in March 2013 through a friend. At that time, she was married but had marital discord, and proceedings were pending in the Family Court, Dwarka, New Delhi. The applicant assured her of help in her matrimonial disputes and induced her to repose confidence in him. On 8th September 2013, the applicant accompanied her to a court hearing in New Delhi and promised to marry her. He desired physical relations, and despite her initial resistance, he had sexual intercourse with her on the promise of marriage. The relationship continued, and she became pregnant twice, but the applicant allegedly forced her to abort. Later, the applicant refused to marry her, leading to the FIR. The applicant contended that the relationship was consensual and that he never made a false promise to marry. The court examined the allegations and the material on record, including WhatsApp chats and emails, which indicated that the relationship was consensual and that the applicant had expressed his inability to marry due to family opposition. The court held that the essential ingredient of a false promise from the inception was missing, and the continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process. The court quashed the FIR and the criminal proceedings.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Inherent Powers - Quashing of FIR - The High Court can exercise inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings if the allegations in the FIR, even if taken at face value, do not constitute any offence or if the proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious. (Paras 1-25) B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 376(2)(n) - Rape - Promise to Marry - Consent - For a conviction under Section 376 IPC based on a false promise to marry, the prosecution must establish that the promise was false from the inception and that the accused had no intention to marry. A mere breach of promise does not constitute rape. (Paras 10-25) C) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 377 - Unnatural Offences - Consent - The same principles regarding consent based on a promise to marry apply to Section 377 IPC. (Paras 10-25) D) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 417, 504, 506 - Cheating, Criminal Intimidation - The allegations of cheating and intimidation must be examined in the context of the relationship and the nature of the promise. (Paras 10-25)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR and prosecution for offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 377, 417, 504 and 506 IPC should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC on the ground that the allegations do not disclose the ingredients of the offences and the continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law.
Final Decision
The court allowed the application and quashed FIR No. 195/2017 and Sessions Case No. 333/2019 pending before the Sessions Judge at Dindoshi, Mumbai.
Law Points
- Section 482 CrPC
- Inherent powers
- Quashing of FIR
- Rape
- Promise to marry
- Consent
- Section 376 IPC
- Section 377 IPC
- Section 417 IPC
- Section 504 IPC
- Section 506 IPC
