"Supreme Court Quashes Rape and Intimidation Charges: Consensual Relationship Misconstrued" "When consensual relationships fail, they cannot be construed as criminal unless statutory offenses are clearly made out."

1. Background of the Case (Paras 2–5)

Acts and Sections Involved:

Indian Penal Code (IPC): Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC): Sections 482 and 164

Facts:

FIR No. 272/2019 was filed at South Rohini Police Station, Delhi, alleging repeated sexual relations under false promises of marriage and threats of violence. A charge sheet was submitted on 22.11.2019. The High Court of Delhi dismissed the appellant's plea to quash the FIR under Section 482 CrPC on 16.10.2023. 2. Allegations and Statements (Paras 6–8)

The complainant alleged that:

She was coerced into a sexual relationship by the appellant under threats to harm her brother. The appellant refused marriage after a prolonged relationship. The complainant’s statement under Section 164 CrPC reiterated these allegations.

Appellant’s Argument:

The relationship was consensual. Contradictions in the complainant’s FIR, MLC report, and CrPC statements. FIR filed out of personal vengeance post the appellant’s marriage in 2019. 3. Legal Issues Considered (Paras 9–13)

Main Issue:

Whether FIR No. 272/2019 alleging offenses under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC should be quashed.

Relevant Legal Provisions Discussed:

Section 376(2)(n) IPC: Punishment for repeated acts of rape. Section 506 IPC: Criminal intimidation. Section 482 CrPC: Power to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of process. 4. Analysis and Court's Findings (Paras 14–21)

Observations:

The relationship began in 2017 and continued till 2019, marked by mutual consent. The complainant continued meeting the appellant despite alleging coercion. No prima facie case of lack of consent or criminal intimidation was established.

Reasoning:

The complainant willingly participated in the relationship, which negates allegations of coercion. Alleged threats lacked corroborative evidence. FIR appeared motivated by the appellant’s marriage to another individual in 2019. 5. Precedents and Ratio Decidendi (Paras 22–23)

Key Cases Cited:

State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992): Guidelines for quashing proceedings under Section 482 CrPC. Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra (2019): Sexual relationships based on false marriage promises must meet strict criteria to constitute rape. XXXX v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024): Consensual relationships cannot be retrospectively criminalized.

Ratio Decidendi:

When a consensual relationship exists, and statutory ingredients of rape or intimidation are absent, criminal prosecution constitutes abuse of process. 6. Final Decision (Para 23) Outcome: High Court's order dated 16.10.2023 is set aside. FIR No. 272/2019, charge sheet, and related proceedings are quashed. Acts and Sections Discussed

Indian Penal Code (IPC):

Section 376(2)(n): Punishment for repeated acts of rape. Section 506: Punishment for criminal intimidation.

Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC):

Section 482: Inherent powers to quash proceedings. Section 164: Procedure for recording statements. Subjects:

Quashing of criminal proceedings in consensual relationships.

#RapeLaws #Consent #FalsePromiseOfMarriage #Section482 #IPC #CriminalLaw

Issue of Consideration: PRASHANT VERSUS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI