Supreme Court quashes rape FIR against government servant, terming it an afterthought and act of vengeance. The judgment highlights misuse of legal process and workplace disputes.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court, on September 22, 2025, quashed a first information report (FIR) registered against Assistant Revenue Inspector Suresh Khawse, who was accused of rape a female colleague. The bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh observed that the FIR was not filed promptly but came only after the complainant faced administrative consequences due to complaints initiated by the accused. The Court termed the FIR an “afterthought” and a tool for “vengeance.”
Case Background
The case arose from a complaint filed by a woman employed as a computer operator in the Suhagi Municipal Corporation, where she worked alongside the accused. Their professional association eventually developed into a personal relationship.
The complainant alleged that on March 15, 2023, the accused called her to his residence after office hours and forced her into physical relations, assuring her that he would marry her. She further alleged that this continued until April 10, 2023, and that when she asked about marriage, he refused and suggested she marry someone else.
The complainant subsequently lodged an FIR on October 13, 2023, claiming rape on the pretext of marriage.
However, before the FIR was filed, the accused had already initiated legal and administrative action against her. On April 24, 2023, he complained to P.S. Adhartaal, District Jabalpur, alleging that the woman had harassed him, threatened suicide, and consumed rat poison at his residence. He also complained to municipal authorities, which led to a show-cause notice being issued to the complainant regarding her conduct.
Supreme Court’s Observations
The Court emphasized that:
- The timing of the FIR, filed months after the alleged incident and only after the complainant faced a show-cause notice, raised serious doubts about its bona fides.
- The complainant and the accused had known each other for five years and had developed a relationship by mutual consent.
- If the complainant believed she had been deceived under the pretext of marriage, she should have filed a complaint immediately upon realizing the refusal, rather than months later.
The bench noted:
“The fact that the subject FIR was only lodged after the issuance of show-cause notice, which obviously has large real-world implications insofar as the complainant is concerned, leaves open a gaping possibility that the same was lodged as an afterthought and was a vehicle for vengeance for the impending consequences.”
ALSO READ: Woman’s Gotra Changes When She Marries: Supreme Court On Widow’s Property Rights
The Court relied on key precedents to arrive at its decision:
- State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992): This landmark case laid down categories under which criminal proceedings can be quashed to prevent abuse of the process of law.
- Mohd. Wajid v. State of U.P. (2023): Reaffirmed that courts must scrutinize the timing and circumstances of complaints to prevent misuse of criminal law.
Applying these principles, the Court found that continuation of proceedings against the accused would amount to misuse of the criminal justice system.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by Suresh Khawse, set aside the Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment dated January 27, 2025, and quashed both the FIR and the chargesheet.
Case Title:
Surendra Khawse Vs State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr
Special Leave Petition (Crl.)No. 3361 OF 2025
Read Judgment: