The Supreme Court of India recently quashed criminal charges against a man accused of sexual assault under the false pretence of marriage, emphasizing that the breakdown of a consensual relationship cannot be criminalized.
Consensual Relationships Cannot Be Criminalized
In a significant ruling, the bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh observed:
“A mere breakup of a relationship between a consenting couple cannot result in initiation of criminal proceedings. What was a consensual relationship between the parties at the initial stages cannot be given a colour of criminality when the said relationship does not fructify into a marital relationship.”
The judgment reiterates that criminal law cannot be invoked in matters where the relationship was consensual from its inception and did not involve coercion or deceit.
Case Overview
The complainant had filed an FIR in September 2019, alleging that the appellant had sexually exploited her under a false promise of marriage. Additionally, she claimed that the appellant threatened her to maintain physical relations, warning that he would harm her family otherwise.
Charges were framed under Sections 376(2)(n) (repeated rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The appellant sought relief from the Delhi High Court, requesting the FIR’s quashing. However, the High Court dismissed his petition, concluding that there was sufficient prima facie evidence to proceed.
Supreme Court’s Findings
The Supreme Court, upon review, found the allegations against the appellant unsustainable. Key observations included:
- No Evidence of a False Promise of Marriage:
The FIR and the complainant’s statement under Section 164 CrPC did not indicate that any promise of marriage was made at the beginning of the relationship in 2017. - Consensual Nature of the Relationship:
The Court noted that the complainant continued meeting the appellant even after the alleged incidents of forced sexual encounters, suggesting a consensual relationship. - Lack of Evidence to Establish Criminal Offences:
The Court held that the facts presented did not meet the criteria for offences under Sections 376(2)(n) or 506 IPC.
Critical Analysis of the High Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court found that the High Court erred in its assessment. By dismissing the appellant’s petition under Section 482 CrPC, the High Court overlooked its inherent power to prevent abuse of the judicial process. The Supreme Court clarified that continuing the prosecution in this case would have been inappropriate.
Judgment and Conclusion
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the FIR, and emphasized the importance of judicial discretion in cases involving consensual relationships. The Court observed:
“The facts of the present case are appropriate for the High Court to have exercised the power available under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of the court’s process by continuing the prosecution.”
This decision underscores the judiciary’s responsibility to distinguish consensual relationships from criminal acts, ensuring that personal disputes do not unjustly translate into criminal proceedings.
Case Title: PRASHANT VERSUS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL JUDGEMENT : Supreme Court Ruling: Consensual Relationship Breakup Cannot Justify Criminal Prosecution
