The Delhi High Court quashed a rape FIR, holding that a consensual romantic relationship between adults cannot be retrospectively labelled as rape merely because it failed. The Court cautioned against using criminal law to settle personal grievances.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a judgment reinforcing the distinction between consensual relationships and criminal sexual assault, the Delhi High Court has held that not every romantic relationship results in marriage and the law cannot be invoked to criminalise a failed relationship between consenting adults.
Quashing an FIR alleging rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and caste-based atrocity under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the Court observed that a consensual relationship turning sour cannot be retrospectively branded as rape.
The ruling was delivered by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on January 12, 2026, in a case involving a Delhi-based academic accused after the breakdown of a long-standing personal relationship.
ALSO READ: Strong Imprint Of Manipulation: Karnataka HC Quashes Rape Case Against Advocate
The FIR was registered in September 2023 at Police Station Wazirabad, Delhi, based on a complaint by the prosecutrix alleging that the accused had forcibly subjected her to sexual intercourse in April 2023 and had made caste-based remarks.
According to the complainant:
- The parties had known each other since 2019
- They shared a close association over several years
- The accused allegedly exploited her sexually on the false promise of marriage
- Caste-based slurs were allegedly used during the incident
Following the investigation, a chargesheet was filed under Section 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, prompting the accused to approach the High Court under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings.
The Court emphasised that consent cannot be examined in isolation and must be assessed in light of the duration of the relationship, the conduct of the parties before and after the alleged incident and the nature of communication between them
The record revealed:
- A relationship spanning nearly four years
- Frequent meetings and continuous WhatsApp communication
- Voluntary stays at the accused’s residence even before the alleged incident
Verified WhatsApp conversations between the parties showed the expressions of mutual affection, normal and cordial communication, even after the alleged incident and absence of protest, distress, coercion, or caste-based abuse
The Court noted that the authenticity of the chats was undisputed and had been verified during anticipatory bail proceedings.
While acknowledging that delay alone is not fatal in sexual offence cases, the Court held that:
- The five-month delay in lodging the FIR
- Coupled with continued interaction after the alleged assault
was a relevant circumstance while assessing the credibility of allegations at the quashing stage.
Rejecting the allegation of sexual exploitation on the false promise of marriage, the Court held that there was no material to show that any promise of marriage was made with dishonest intent at the inception. The WhatsApp conversations did not contain any assurance of marriage and a failed relationship cannot automatically amount to rape.
Clarifying the scope of Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, the Court reiterated that the offence must be committed on the ground of the victim’s caste and mere knowledge of caste is insufficient
In the present case:
- No contemporaneous material supported caste-based motivation
- Verified communications did not disclose any caste-related abuse
Accordingly, the Court held that the invocation of the SC/ST Act was unsustainable.
Justice Sharma made crucial observations on autonomy and adult choice:
“An educated and independent adult, upon entering into a consensual relationship, must recognise that the law cannot be invoked to criminalise the mere failure of a relationship.”
The Court further noted:
“It is neither inevitable nor assured that every romantic relationship will result in marriage. Relationships may end for a variety of personal, practical, or circumstantial reasons.”
The Court cautioned against the growing tendency to:
- Convert personal grievances into criminal prosecutions
- Invoke serious penal provisions to settle emotional or interpersonal disputes
It was observed that such misuse:
- Undermines the object of protective laws
- Causes irreparable damage to the accused’s reputation and liberty
- Burdens the criminal justice system
Holding that the case satisfied the parameters for exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, the Delhi High Court quashed FIR No. 904/2023, set aside all proceedings under Section 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act and declared continuation of prosecution an abuse of process of law.
Case Title:
Dr Avadesh Kumar v State NCT of Delhi and Anr
CRL.M.C. 3/2025
READ JUDGMENT
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Fake Rape
