Shubham Dharwa vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
1
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JAI KUMAR PILLAI

CRIMINAL REVISION No. 5505 of 2024
SHUBHAM DHARWA S/O OMPRAKASH DHARWA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ONE ANOTHER

Appearance:
Shri Abhay Saraswat - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Jay Gopal Chouksey – G.A for the respondent/State.

Reserved on : 20.08.2026
Post on : 01.09.2026
______________________________________________________
ORDER
1. This criminal revision has been preferred against the
impugned order dated 06/09/2024, whereby the learned Special
Judge (O.A.W.) / 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Indore, District
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
2
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
Indore (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 570/2024 has framed charges
against the petitioner for offences punishable under Section
376(2)(n) and Section 506 (Part-2) of the Indian Penal Code. Being
aggrieved and unsatisfied by the framing of the aforementioned
charges, the applicant/petitioner has filed this criminal revision
before this Court.
2. FACTS IN BRIEF
3. The facts of the prosecution case, briefly stated, emerge from
a written complaint submitted by the prosecutrix to the police on
26/12/2023. The prosecutrix, a resident of Indore, stated that she
came into contact with the applicant a few years ago. This initial
acquaintance was established through the social media platform
Instagram. Following this online introduction, both parties began
communicating, exchanged mobile numbers, and frequently
engaged in conversations over the telephone.
4. It is the further case of the prosecution that the prosecutrix
had recently obtained a divorce from her husband. Due to the
dissolution of her marriage, she was allegedly passing through a
difficult phase and was not in a good mental state. The prosecution
alleges that the applicant, taking undue advantage of her vulnerable
mental condition, befriended her. It is claimed that under a false
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
3
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
pretext of marriage, the applicant established a physical relationship
with the prosecutrix.
5. The prosecution additionally alleges that during the
subsistence of their relationship, the applicant borrowed significant
financial sums. Specifically, it is alleged that he obtained money to
the tune of rupees ten lakhs from the prosecutrix over a period of
time. The complaint further asserts that when the prosecutrix began
insisting that the applicant fulfill his promise of marriage, he
resorted to verbal abuse, initiated quarrels, and exhibited aggressive
behavior toward her.
6. It is also alleged that the applicant issued severe threats to the
prosecutrix, stating that he would make their intimate pictures viral
on public platforms in order to harm her reputation in society.
Subsequently, he allegedly severed all contact and stopped meeting
or talking to her. Upon receiving this complaint, the police
registered an FIR and, after concluding the investigation, filed a
charge sheet under Sections 376(2)(n), 294, and 506 of the IPC
against the applicant.
CONTENTIONS OF THE REVISIONIST
7. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently submits that
the impugned order framing charges is fundamentally contrary to
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
4
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
law and established facts. It is contended that the prosecutrix is a
major, mature, and divorced woman who is approximately twelve
years older than the present applicant. The defense asserts that even
if the prosecution allegations are taken at face value, it is evident
that the parties were involved in a relationship out of their own free
will and mutual consent.
8. The learned counsel further highlights a significant
discrepancy regarding the initiation of criminal proceedings. It is
pointed out that just two days prior to the present FIR, the
prosecutrix filed a complaint on 23/12/2023. In that prior
complaint, the allegations were strictly limited to the recovery of
the monetary sum of rupees ten lakhs, without a single whisper of
any sexual offence. Thus, it is argued that the present FIR is an
afterthought and significantly delayed.
9. It is also contended that the prosecutrix deliberately
suppressed material facts in the FIR. Specifically, the parties came
into contact in the year 2019, and the prosecutrix had established a
relationship with the applicant while she was still bound by her
previous legal marriage. Furthermore, the defense argues that given
the substantial age gap, wherein the applicant is significantly
younger, there was absolutely no possibility of the applicant
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
5
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
exerting influence or dominance over the decisions of the
prosecutrix.
10. To further establish the bona fides of the applicant, it is
submitted that he is a twenty-eight-year-old practicing advocate
registered with the State Bar of Madhya Pradesh. He has no
previous criminal antecedents and is a reputed member of the
society and the legal fraternity. The defense maintains that there
was merely a mutual exchange of money between the parties over
time. Furthermore, photographic evidence annexed with the petition
demonstrates a consensual relationship devoid of any force or
coercion.
CONTENTIONS OF THE STATE / RESPONDENT

11. Per contra, the learned counsel representing the State has
strongly opposed the submissions advanced on behalf of the
applicant. It is submitted by the State that at the stage of framing
charges, the trial court is only required to see whether a prima facie
case is made out. Relying upon the averments in the FIR and the
material compiled in the charge sheet, the State argues that the trial
court has committed no error in framing the charges and the
revision deserves to be dismissed.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
6
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
12. This Court has considered the rival submissions and perused
the entire record.
13. At the very outset, it is essential to delineate the scope and
limitations of the revisional jurisdiction exercised by this Court.
The revisional power vested in the High Court is strictly
supervisory in nature. The revisional Court does not function as a
regular Court of appeal, and therefore, a meticulous re-appreciation
of evidence is generally impermissible at this stage.
14. To analyze the legality of the charges framed, it is necessary
to refer to the statutory provisions. An offence of rape, if
established in terms of Section 375, is punishable under Section 376
of the IPC. In the present factual scenario, the second description of
Section 376 is relevant, which is reproduced as under:
―376. Punishment for rape. – 1. Whoever, except in the
cases provided for in subsection (2), commits rap, shall
be punished with rigorous imprisonment of either
description for a term which shall not be less than ten
years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life,
and shall also be liable to fine.
Whoever,
x x x
n. commits rape repeatedly on the same woman, shall
be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
7
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
which shall not be less than ten years, but which may
extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean
imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural
life, and shall also be liable to fine.‖
15. Furthermore, the applicant has been charged with criminal
intimidation. Section 506 IPC prescribes the punishment for
criminal intimidation, which is defined under Section 503 IPC. The
relevant statutory provisions read as under:
―503. Criminal intimidation.— Whoever threatens
another with any injury to his person, reputation or
property, or to the person or reputation of any one in
whom that person is interested, with intent to cause
alarm to that person, or to cause that person to do any
act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to
do any act which that person is legally entitled to do,
as the means of avoiding the execution of such threat,
commits criminal intimidation. Explanation.— A
threat to injure the reputation of any deceased person
in whom the person threatened is interested, is within
this section.
x x x
Punishment for criminal intimidation.— Whoever
commits, the offence of criminal intimidation shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or
with both; If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt,
etc.— And if the threat be to cause death or grievous
hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by fire,
or to cause an offence punishable with death or
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
8
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to seven years, or to impute,
unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.‖
16. The legal proposition regarding the establishment of consent
and misconception of fact in such matters has been clearly laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In the case of Pramod
Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, (2019) 9 SCC 608 :
(2019) 3 SCC (Cri) 903 : 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1073 at page
620, the Apex Court held as under:
“18. To summarise the legal position that emerges
from the above cases, the “consent” of a woman with
respect to Section 375 must involve an active and
reasoned deliberation towards the proposed act. To
establish whether the “consent” was vitiated by a
“misconception of fact” arising out of a promise to
marry, two propositions must be established. The
promise of marriage must have been a false promise,
given in bad faith and with no intention of being
adhered to at the time it was given. The false promise
itself must be of immediate relevance, or bear a direct
nexus to the woman's decision to engage in the sexual
act.”

17. In the present case, the entire prosecution machinery was set
in motion based on a written complaint submitted by the
prosecutrix. On a careful perusal of the aforesaid complaint, it is
evident that the prosecutrix herself narrated the sequence of events
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
9
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
leading to the dispute. She admitted that she first came to know the
applicant through social media, following which they began
communicating and exchanged mobile numbers. She explicitly
informed the applicant about her recent divorce and her fragile
mental state, seeking to overcome that situation, which allegedly
led the applicant to befriend her and trap her in his web of words.
18. The record further reveals the nature and progression of the
relationship between the two adults over time. Initially, the
prosecutrix herself had denied the proposal for marriage, but she
subsequently agreed to it. It is clearly established from the material
on record that at one point in time, both parties harbored a genuine
intention to marry each other, although this mutual plan ultimately
did not materialize due to subsequent differences.
19. Both the applicant and the complainant are educated adults
who engaged in a relationship possessing all the characteristics of
mutual consent. Taking the allegations in the FIR and the
chargesheet exactly as they stand, the crucial ingredients required to
constitute the offence under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC are
completely absent. There is nothing to suggest a false promise made
in bad faith from the very inception of the relationship.
20. Therefore, even if the prosecution's case is accepted at its
highest face value, it cannot be safely concluded that the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
10
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
complainant engaged in a sexual relationship solely on account of a
false assurance of marriage. The relationship between the parties
remained consensual over a significant period. A mere subsequent
breakup of a relationship between a consenting couple cannot
automatically result in the initiation of criminal proceedings.
21. What inherently was a consensual relationship between the
parties at the initial stages cannot be given a sudden color of
criminality merely because it failed to culminate in marriage.
Turning to the charge of criminal intimidation, the essential
ingredients mandate a threat to another person with the specific
intent to cause alarm. The entire relationship being consensual and
aimed toward marriage, the contextual background completely
negates the requisite intent for criminal intimidation against the
complainant.
22. In the considered opinion of this Court, it is abundantly clear
that the parties indulged in sexual activity within the context of a
consensual relationship intended to result into marriage.
Consequently, there cannot be a sustainable case of criminal
intimidation or rape against the applicant. The findings recorded by
the learned trial court while framing the charges inherently suffer
from perversity, material irregularity, and a complete misreading of
the available legal framework.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
11
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
23. Permitting the trial to proceed on such baseless charges
would amount to a gross abuse of the process of law and a severe
miscarriage of justice. This Court finds that the impugned order of
the subordinate court cannot withstand legal scrutiny as it is vitiated
by jurisdictional error and patent illegality. Therefore, interference
by this Court under its supervisory revisional jurisdiction is highly
warranted to secure the ends of justice.
24. Accordingly, based on the detailed analysis and findings
recorded hereinabove, the present criminal revision is allowed. The
impugned order dated 06/09/2024, passed by the learned Special
Judge (O.A.W.) / 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Indore, District
Indore (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 570/2024, is hereby set aside.
25. As a necessary consequence, the applicant, Shubham Dharva,
stands completely discharged from all the charges levelled against
him under Section 376(2)(n) and Section 506 (Part-2) of the Indian
Penal Code. His bail bonds and surety bonds, if any, shall stand
discharged forthwith. Let a copy of this final order be promptly
transmitted to the concerned trial court for necessary information
and immediate compliance.

(Jai Kumar Pillai)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:24456
12
Cr.R. NO. 5505/2024
Judge
hk/
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: HARIKUMAR
NAIR
Signing time: 9/1/2026
5:11:48 PM