Quashing proceedings in a rape case filed over a ‘false promise of marriage’, the Allahabad High Court Thursday observed that it is neither inevitable nor assured that every romantic relationship will result in marriage.
It added that relationships may end for a variety of personal, practical, or circumstantial reasons, including incompatibility or change in individual priorities.
In its order, the single bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Singh observed further, “This court has seen in a large number of cases that there is a growing trend that consensual relationships going on for a prolonged period, upon turning sour, have been sought to be criminalised by invoking criminal jurisprudence.”
It added, “An educated and independent adult, upon entering into a consensual relationship, must also recognise that the law cannot be invoked to criminalise the mere failure of a relationship. The dissolution of a relationship, by itself, does not give rise to criminal liability. Such matters must be approached with sensitivity, restraint, and due respect for the autonomy and choices of both individuals involved.”
The case
In the matter brought before the high court, the woman initially lodged the FIR on charges of rape on false promise of marriage, assault and criminal initimidation on August 10, 2019, in Prayagraj district.
The accused then married her with consent of both families after the case was registered.
However, the woman did not withdraw the case even after the marriage, but pursued it more diligently, stating that the husband was not treating her as a wife and she was not getting due respect as ought to be provided to a married woman.
She stuck to her statement deposed earlier before the magistrate and the police, and the investigating officer submitted the chargesheet against the accused on charges of rape, assault and criminal intimidation in January 2020.
The accused husband filed a petition in the high court praying for:
- Quashing of the chargesheet
- The order of the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad taking cognizance of the chargesheet
- And the entire proceedings of the case.
The woman, in her FIR, had alleged that she was preparing for competitive examinations in Prayagraj since 2014. That’s where she met the man.
She alleged that the man eventually established physical relations with her by promising marriage. She lodged the rape case as he kept refusing to marry her.
After the rape case was lodged, the man and the woman got married on August 27 at Arya Samaj Mandir in Prayagraj in the presence of both their families.
What both sides argued
Since the woman did not withdraw the case, the man filed a writ petition the same year in the case against him.
The woman opposed the petition, stating it appears that the marriage was just a sham to escape legal consequences.
The division bench of the high court, in its order dated November 2019, granted protection to the man and his arrest was stayed till submission of police report.
Placing his submission before the court during the hearing held in May, the counsel for the husband stated that the woman was in touch with him for five years and the FIR was a result of a broken relationship.
He said there is no mention of the date, time, and place of the rape incident committed for the first time. His counsel further stated the woman is educated, holding MA, LLB and BEd degrees.
The counsel for the woman and the additional government advocate opposed the petitioner’s prayer, submitting that the woman was exploited for the last five years and the man married her in order to save himself.
What the court said
The bench of Justice Singh stated the woman was mature and intelligent enough to understand the consequences of moral and immoral acts.
“By no stretch of imagination, it can be said that she had given her consent for sexual relations under any misconception. The continued relationship for five years convinces this court that it is a clear case of a love relationship turned sour,” the court stated.
The bench stated in its order that no offence of rape is made out against the applicant and the FIR was lodged as the woman was annoyed by his behaviour, and to exert pressure upon the applicant for marriage.
The court quashed the entire proceedings of the rape case pending in the local court stating, “… This Court finds that the present case stands on the footing of the rarest of rare case to invoke the inherent jurisdiction for quashing the criminal proceedings, as continuing with [it] would be in futility and gross misuse of criminal jurisdiction.”
The Allahabad High Court said its order should not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the trial court order. (File Photo) 
Share
