New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said a consensual relationship turning sour or partners becoming distant cannot be a ground for invoking criminal machinery and such conduct not only burdens the courts but also blots the identity of accused.
A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma said this while hearing an appeal against a Bombay High Court order rejecting the plea of the accused appellant seeking quashing of the case registered against him for alleged offences, including that of rape, in Satara, Maharashtra registered on a complaint of a woman.
What did the complainant woman say?
The woman in her complaint alleged that the accused forcibly had sexual intercourse with her on the false assurance of marriage during June 2022 till July 2023. The complainant woman, who had been previously married, had obtained Khulanama from her former husband and had been residing with her 4-year-old son at her parental home in Kalegaon. while the accused appellant, a 23-year-old student was residing as a tenant next door with three other men since May 2022.
The parties became acquainted in June 2022 and it turned into a friendship and they soon began interacting more frequently. The relationship blossomed into love, but it is stated that the complainant woman repeatedly denied to make physical relations with the appellant accused. As per the complaint, the appellant accused had entered her house in July 2022 and at night and said that once she obtains divorce from her husband, he would instantly marry her and had sexual intercourse with her on this pretext despite her denial. The accused had sexual intercourse with her on several other occasions and later refused to marry her, the complainant woman alleged.
Appellant accused denied allegations against him
The appellant accused denied the allegations of having forced sexual intercourse with the complainant woman on the assurance of marriage, and stated that it was in-fact the complainant woman who had approached him with proposals and would regularly visit his college, which even led to grievances raised with the college faculty.
Narrative of the complainant does not corroborate with her conduct: Apex Court
The bench, while quashing the case registered against the man, noted that even if allegations levelled in the FIR were taken as true and correct depiction of circumstances, it does not appear from the record that the consent of the complainant was obtained against her will and merely on an assurance to marry.
The bench further noted that appellant accused and the complainant woman were acquainted since June 8, 2022, and she herself admits that they interacted frequently and fell in love and she engaged in a physical relationship alleging that the appellant had done so without her consent, however she not only sustained her relationship for over 12 months, but continued to visit him in lodges on two separate occasions and the narrative of the complainant does not corroborate with her conduct.
Such conduct not only burdens the courts, but blots the identity of an individual: Apex Court
“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. Such conduct not only burdens the courts, but blots the identity of an individual accused of such a heinous offence. This court has time and again warned against the misuse of the provisions, and has termed it a folly to treat each breach of promise to marry as a false promise and prosecute a person for an offence under section 376 IPC,” the bench said.
There is no evidence of coercion or threat of injury to the complainant woman, apex court noted
The bench further said that there is no evidence of coercion or threat of injury to the complainant woman and it is improbable that there was any threat caused to the complainant woman by the appellant when all along the relationship was cordial, and it was only when the appellant graduated and left for his home town to Ahmednagar, the complainant became agitated. It further said that it also cannot ignore the conduct of the complainant in visiting the native village of the appellant without any intimation, which is also unacceptable and reflects the agitated and unnerved state of mind of the complainant and the criminal prosecution against the appellant is probably with an underlying motive and disgruntled state of mind.
“There is also no reasonable possibility that the complainant/Respondent no. 2 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,” the bench said.
Accused appellant is just 25 years of age and has a lifetime ahead of him: Apex Court
The bench further noted that the accused appellant is just 25 years of age and has a lifetime ahead of him and it would be in the interest of justice that he does not suffer an impending trial.
“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,” the bench said while setting aside the High Court order and quashing the case against the man.
