Supreme Court Allows Appeal in IPC Section 376 Case — Quashes Charge Sheet Due to Lack of Offence. Citing that the relationship was consensual and the promise to marry was not false at inception.

In Favour of Accused
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal arose from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, which dismissed an application for quashing a charge sheet under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant, Sonu @ Subhash Kumar, challenged the High Court's decision, arguing that the relationship with the second respondent was consensual and that there was no intent to deceive regarding the promise of marriage. The FIR, lodged by the second respondent, detailed a relationship lasting one and a half years, during which the appellant allegedly assured her of marriage. However, upon visiting the appellant's home in Jhansi, she was informed that he did not wish to marry her, leading to the FIR's registration. The court analyzed the FIR and the statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC, concluding that the allegations did not establish an offence under Section 376 IPC. The court emphasized that the promise to marry was not false at the inception, and the refusal to marry occurred later. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashing the charge sheet and the trial court's cognizance order, stating that the High Court erred in its judgment. The court also noted that no further action would be taken regarding a cross-FIR filed by the appellant against the second respondent.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Quashing of Charge Sheet - No Offence Established - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 482 - The court found that the relationship between the appellant and the second respondent was consensual and that the promise to marry was not false at inception. The FIR did not establish any offence under Section 376 IPC as the refusal to marry occurred subsequently, leading to the quashing of the charge sheet (Paras 12).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the allegations in the FIR constituted an offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the charge sheet dated 25 April 2018, and set aside the trial court's cognizance order dated 3 October 2018.

Law Points

  • Quashing of charge sheet
  • consent in relationships
  • promise to marry
  • Section 376 IPC
  • Section 482 CrPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (SC) (03) 149

Criminal Appeal No 233 of 2021

2021-03-01

Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, M R Shah

Amit Pawan, Anand Nandan, Vishnu Shankar Jain, Chanakya Gupta, Simant Kumar, Ravi Prakash, Jaishree Raj Soni, Sandeep Malik, Vagisha Nandini, Vikram Singh Arya

Sonu @ Subhash Kumar

State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the dismissal of an application for quashing a charge sheet under IPC.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to quash the charge sheet and the trial court's cognizance order.

Filing Reason

Allegations of non-consensual relationship leading to a charge under Section 376 IPC.

Previous Decisions

High Court dismissed the application for quashing the charge sheet.

Issues

Whether the allegations in the FIR constituted an offence under Section 376 IPC Whether the promise to marry was false at inception

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the relationship was consensual and no offence was made out. Respondent supported the High Court's decision, asserting the FIR indicated a promise to marry.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that a promise to marry must be false at inception to constitute an offence under Section 376 IPC. The relationship was consensual, and the refusal to marry occurred subsequently, thus no offence was established.

Judgment Excerpts

The FIR specifically records that the second respondent had developed a friendship with the appellant and that he had assured that he would marry her. The court found that the relationship between the appellant and the second respondent was consensual and that the promise to marry was not false at inception.

Procedural History

The appeal arose from a judgment of the High Court dated 26 September 2019, which dismissed the application for quashing the charge sheet.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 482
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 376
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Maintenance Rights of Divorced Muslim Wife Under Criminal Procedure Code Due to Misinterpretation of Law. The definition of 'wife' under Section 125(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, includes women who have obtained a div...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order on Seniority in Tamil Nadu Registration Services Due to Erroneous Application of Rules. Seniority of Promotees Cannot Be Counted from Temporary Appointments Made Outside Recruitment Rules.