Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by Batlanki Keshav (Kesava) Kumar Anurag against the State of Telangana and another, challenging the order of the Telangana High Court which rejected his petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of FIR No. 103 of 2022. The FIR was registered for offences under Section 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The dispute arose from a matrimonial relationship between the appellant and the de-facto complainant, who met through a matrimonial website. The complainant alleged that the appellant promised to marry her but later refused, and that he had sexual relations with her on multiple occasions under the false promise of marriage. She also alleged caste-based discrimination. The appellant contended that the relationship was consensual and that the complainant was habitual in filing complaints. The Court noted that the complainant had filed multiple FIRs with contradictory allegations, and that the sexual relations were consensual without any false promise of marriage from the inception. The Court held that the High Court erred in not quashing the FIR as the allegations did not make out a prima facie case for the offences alleged. The Court emphasized that the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC must be exercised to prevent abuse of process of law. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court order and quashed the FIR and all proceedings arising therefrom.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 CrPC - Abuse of Process - Where the complainant filed multiple FIRs with contradictory allegations and the sexual relationship was consensual without a false promise of marriage, the FIR is liable to be quashed to prevent abuse of process of law. Held that the High Court ought to have exercised its inherent powers to quash the FIR as the allegations did not make out a prima facie case. (Paras 18-22) B) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376(2)(n) IPC - False Promise of Marriage - For an offence under Section 376(2)(n) IPC, the promise of marriage must be false from the inception and the consent must be based on such false promise. Held that where the parties had a consensual relationship and the accused later backed out due to personal reasons, no offence of rape is made out. (Paras 18-22) C) Criminal Law - Atrocities - Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST(POA) Act - Prima Facie Case - The offence under Section 3(2)(v) requires that the accused committed an offence under IPC against a person belonging to SC/ST knowing that the victim belongs to such community. Held that in the absence of a prima facie case for the predicate IPC offence, the charge under the SC/ST Act also fails. (Paras 18-22)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in rejecting the petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of FIR for offences under Section 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST(POA) Act, given the inconsistencies between multiple FIRs and the consensual nature of the relationship.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court order dated 13th December 2022, and quashed FIR No. 103 of 2022 and all proceedings arising therefrom.
Law Points
- Quashing of FIR under Section 482 CrPC
- False promise of marriage
- Consent in sexual offences
- Abuse of process of law
- Inherent powers of High Court
