The bench highlighted that the Supreme Court has repeatedly cautioned against misuse of rape laws and reminded that every broken promise to marry should not be treated as rape.
New Delhi – The Supreme Court of India on Monday ruled that a breakup in a consensual relationship or growing distance between partners cannot be treated as a criminal offence. It also stressed that using criminal laws in such cases damages the identity of the accused and unnecessarily burdens the courts.
A bench comprising Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma gave this judgment while quashing a rape case filed against a young man in Satara, Maharashtra, where the complainant alleged that he had a sexual relationship with her under a false promise of marriage.
While going through the FIR and other case records, the court said that even if the woman’s allegations were taken as true, “it does not appear from the record that the complainant’s consent was obtained against her will and merely on an assurance to marry.”
The court further observed, “In our considered view, this is also not a case where there was a false promise to marry to begin with. A consensual relationship turning sour or partners becoming distant cannot be a ground for invoking criminal machinery of the State.”
It added, “Such conduct not only burdens the courts, but blots the identity of an individual accused of such a heinous offence.”
The bench highlighted that the Supreme Court has repeatedly cautioned against misuse of rape laws and reminded that every broken promise to marry should not be treated as rape.
The court said that it is a “folly” to consider each breach of promise to marry as a false promise and then proceed with criminal proceedings.
The top court gave this judgment in response to an appeal filed by the accused, who had challenged the Bombay High Court’s June 2024 order dismissing his plea to quash the FIR registered against him. The woman had filed a complaint alleging that from June 2022 to July 2023, the man had forcibly engaged in sexual relations with her under the false assurance of marriage.
The accused had denied the allegations and had already secured anticipatory bail from a lower court in August 2023.
The court noted that the woman and the accused had known each other since June 2022, and the woman admitted that they were in frequent contact and had fallen in love.
The court also pointed out an important fact — the woman had executed a ‘Khulanama’ on December 29, 2022, which is a legal document obtained from her ex-husband under Muslim personal law allowing a woman to unilaterally divorce her husband by returning the dower.
In light of this, the bench observed, “It is inconceivable that the complainant had engaged in a physical relationship with the appellant, on the assurance of marriage, while she was already married to someone else.”
The court said it could not ignore the woman’s action of visiting the accused’s native village without informing him, calling such behaviour “unacceptable” and a sign of her “agitated and unnerved state”.
ALSO READ: Adani Group Accusations Demand Supreme Court Investigation, Says AAP MP Sanjay Singh
The bench went on to say, “For the same reason, the criminal prosecution against the appellant herein is probably with an underlying motive and disgruntled state of mind.”
Further, the judges stated, “There is also no reasonable possibility that the complainant/respondent no. two or any woman being married before and having a child of four years, would continue to be deceived by the appellant or maintain a prolonged association or physical relationship with an individual who has sexually assaulted and exploited her.”
In its final verdict, the court allowed the appeal and quashed the FIR.
It stated, “Taking into consideration that the appellant is just 25 years of age, and has a lifetime ahead of him, it would be in the interest of justice that he does not suffer an impending trial and, therefore, the proceedings emanating from… are quashed at this stage itself.”
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
