Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Sidharth Vishwanath Wasnik, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking quashing of FIR No. 123/2017 registered at Badnera Police Station, District Amravati, for offences under Sections 376 (rape), 417 (cheating), and 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The FIR was lodged by the second non-applicant, Kanchan Kisanrao Kale, on 24 April 2017. The complainant alleged that she belonged to a scheduled caste and had a love affair with the applicant since 2015, though they had a friendly relationship since 2010. She claimed that the applicant frequently visited her house and she also stayed at his house for two to three days at a time. The couple had informed their families that they would marry after securing jobs. The complainant alleged that they had sexual intercourse on several occasions, always taking precautions to avoid pregnancy. In February 2017, when the complainant's parents visited the applicant's house to discuss marriage, the applicant's parents refused, citing the complainant's lack of employment. Subsequently, the applicant's parents arranged his marriage to another woman, and the applicant ended the relationship. The complainant alleged that the applicant had sexual relations with her on the false promise of marriage. The applicant sought quashing of the FIR, arguing that the relationship was consensual and the promise of marriage was not false from the beginning. The court examined the allegations and found that the parties had a long-term consensual relationship, the families were aware, and the promise of marriage was conditional upon securing jobs. The court held that for an offence under Section 376 IPC, the promise of marriage must be false from the inception of the relationship, and the man must have had the intention to deceive the woman at the time of obtaining consent. Since the allegations indicated a consensual relationship and no deception from the start, the court quashed the FIR for offences under Sections 376 and 417 IPC. However, the court noted that the offence under Section 323 IPC (voluntarily causing hurt) was not specifically addressed in the submissions, but the FIR was quashed in its entirety as the allegations did not make out a prima facie case for any of the offences. The court allowed the application and quashed the FIR.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - False Promise of Marriage - Section 375, 376 IPC - Consent - The court examined whether sexual intercourse based on a promise of marriage constitutes rape. Held that for an offence under Section 376 IPC, the promise must be false from the beginning and the man must have had the intention to deceive the woman at the time of obtaining consent. In this case, the long-term consensual relationship and the fact that the parties had planned to marry after securing jobs indicated that the promise was not false from inception. (Paras 4-6) B) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 CrPC - Abuse of Process - The court considered the power to quash FIR when allegations do not make out a prima facie offence. Held that where the allegations in the FIR, even if taken at face value, do not constitute the alleged offence, the FIR is liable to be quashed to prevent abuse of process. (Para 6) C) Criminal Law - Cheating - Section 417 IPC - Consent - The court examined whether the offence of cheating is made out when the promise of marriage was not false from the beginning. Held that since the relationship was consensual and the promise was not false at inception, no offence under Section 417 IPC is made out. (Para 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR for offences under Sections 376, 417 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) should be quashed when the allegations indicate a consensual relationship and no false promise of marriage from the inception of the relationship.
Final Decision
The court allowed the criminal application and quashed the FIR registered against the applicant for offences under Sections 376, 417 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code.
Law Points
- Consent obtained on false promise of marriage constitutes rape only if promise was false from inception
- Long-term consensual relationship negates inference of deception
- Quashing of FIR under Section 482 CrPC when allegations do not disclose prima facie offence
