KUNAL RAMESHBHAI KALYANI vs STATE OF GUJARAT

R/CR.MA/7256/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 7256 of 2026

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER

==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
KUNAL RAMESHBHAI KALYANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RONAK RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER

Date : 08/05/2026

JUDGMENT
1. The present application is filed under Section 528 of the
BNSS, 2023, for quashing the FIR registered with Sayajiganj
Police Station, Vadodara City, dated 20.05.2025 for the offence
punishable under Sections 69 of BNS Act being I-CR
No.11196030250292 of 2025.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Virat Popat for the applicant
and learned APP Mr. Ronak Raval for the respondent - State.
Learned advocate Mr. Popat submitted that as per the
allegations made in the FIR, the applicant came into contact
Page 1 of 10
Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Fri May 08 2026 Downloaded on : Mon May 11 12:17:55 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/7256/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
with the first informant through Facebook on 11.11.2022, and
then after they started conversation with each other. He
submitted that as per the allegations the applicant enticed the
complainant with promise of marriage and invited her to
Vadodara. The first informant went to Vadodara Railway
Station on 12.02.2024, and the applicant took her in the hotel
namely Hotel Sunday, Sayajiganj, in room no.538, where they
stayed together, and under the pretext of marriage indulged
into physical relations. It is submitted that as per the
allegations, the applicant had assured to get married with the
complainant in the month of December 2024, and later in
January 2025, the applicant refused to marry with the
complainant as his mother did not accept their relationship. It
is submitted that the applicant is the permanent resident of
Zambia, and during the period when the applicant was in
contact with the complainant he was also in contact with the
mother of the complainant, and has provided the financial
assistance by transferring the amount of Rs.40,000/-. It is
submitted that the applicant has also sent the mobile phones
and clothes to the complainant from Mumbai amounting to
Rs.32,000/- as well as was in contact with the maternal aunt of
the complainant. The said aspect clearly demonstrates that the
relationship between the applicant and the complainant was
cordial, voluntary and genuine in nature, and applicant had
never extended any false promises or induced the complainant
as alleged in the FIR. It is submitted that the alleged incident
has taken place during the 12.02.2024 to 01.01.2025, and the
FIR came to be lodged after delay of approximately five
months from the date of alleged incident which creates serious
doubts about the veracity and genuineness of the allegations
Page 2 of 10
Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Fri May 08 2026 Downloaded on : Mon May 11 12:17:55 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/7256/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
made against the applicant. It is submitted that even if the
allegations made in the FIR are accepted to be true, no prima-
facie cognizable case is made out leveling the charge under
Section 69 of the BNS Act. It is submitted that merely an
attempt and false case is foisted by the complainant, and the
complainant and the applicant are belonging to different
communities, and the complainant and the applicant both were
adult were indulged into physical relations, in that background,
it cannot be said that ingredients of Section 69 of the BNS Act
is satisfied. It is submitted that even otherwise also allegations
levelled against the applicant are so absurd and improbable on
which no prudent person can ever reach to a conclusion that
any offence is made out. In that background, it is prayed to
quash the impugned FIR, and allow the present application.
Learned advocate Mr. Popat has also relied upon the following
decisions in support of his submissions.
(i) In the case of Mahesh Damu Khare Vs. The State of
Maharashtra & Anr. neutral citation 2024 INSC 897
(ii) In the case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Vs. State of
Maharashtra and another reported in (2019) 9 SCC
608
(iii) In the case of Anurag Soni Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
reported in (2019) 13 SCC
(iv) In the case of Naim Ahamed Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 66
3. Per contra, learned advocate APP Mr. Ronak Raval for
respondent - State submitted that the applicant had not
cooperated with the investigation, and at present,
investigation is at large. In that background, interference at
Page 3 of 10
Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Fri May 08 2026 Downloaded on : Mon May 11 12:17:55 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/7256/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
this stage would be uncalled for.
4. Having considered the submissions made by the learned
advocates for the respective parties and referring the
allegations made in the FIR which is reproduced hereinbelow:
"On the date 11 November, 2022, I had come into contact with
Krunal Rameshbhai Kalyani, residing at 501, Sai Vedanta, behind Jai
Hind College, Chopra Court, Ulhasnagar, Kalyan, Mumbai,
Maharashtra, through Facebook, and we used to converse with each
other through Facebook; thereafter, a friendship developed
between us, and the said Krunal Rameshbhai Kalyani had
communicated with me regarding marrying me, and the said Krunal
had called me for the first time at Vadodara, and prior thereto,
neither Krunal nor I had ever met each other in person, and
therefore, I had come to meet Krunal on 12 February, 2024 at
Vadodara Railway Station, and the said Krunal had met me near
Sindh Restaurant at Vadodara in person, and the said Krunal
Rameshbhai Kalyani had taken me to Sunday Hotel situated at
Sayajigunj, and he had booked Room No. 538 in the said hotel, and
the said Krunal had taken me to the hotel room and kept me with
him from 12/02/2024 to 14/02/2024, and he had stated that he
would marry me by December 2024 and on that pretext he had
repeatedly established physical relations with me; thereafter, I had
returned to Ahmedabad, and the said Krunal did not marry me in
December 2024, and in January 2025, Krunal informed me that his
mother was refusing for his marriage with me and therefore he
would not marry me, and by stating so he refused to marry me;
nevertheless, I repeatedly contacted Krunal through mobile and
WhatsApp chats and also went to his residence at Mumbai and
requested Krunal to marry me, but the said Krunal refused to marry
Page 4 of 10
Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Fri May 08 2026 Downloaded on : Mon May 11 12:17:55 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/7256/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
me, and therefore, at the relevant time, I had submitted an
application for inquiry in this regard, and today I have come to
lodge this complaint in this matter."
5. It is true that the period of offence stated in column no.3
starting from 12.02.2024 to 01.01.2025, and the FIR came to
be lodged on 20.05.2025. However, the explanation offered in
the FIR is that after the applicant had refused to marry with the
complainant, she went to Mumbai, had sent WhatsApp
messages, and when all efforts which are made by the
complainant went in vain, there after, she lodged the
complaint. As per the settled law, for quashing the FIR, delay
cannot be considered to be a sole ground. If the allegations
made in the FIR would be considered then it emerges that after
they both i.e. the applicant and the complainant came into
contact through Facebook, the applicant called the
complainant on 12.02.2024 at Vadodara and taken her to the
Hotel Sunday, where the applicant had already booked a room
being No.538. They both were stayed in the said Hotel from
12.02.2024 to 14.02.2024, and by promising the complainant
to marry her in the month of December 2024, the applicant
indulged into sexual relations with the complainant. At this
stage, it would be appropriate to refer Section 69 of the BNS
Act for which the charge levelled against the applicant.
Section 69: Sexual intercourse by employing deceitful
means etc.
Whoever, by deceitful means or by making promise to marry a
woman without any intention of fulfilling the same, and has sexual
intercourse with her, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the
offence of rape, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
Page 5 of 10
Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Fri May 08 2026 Downloaded on : Mon May 11 12:17:55 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/7256/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
description for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also
be liable to fine.
Explanation: “deceitful means” shall include the false promise of
employment or promotion, inducement or marring after suppressing
identity.
Classification of Offence : Cognizable - Non-bailable - Triable by
Court of Session - Punishment: Imprisonment which may extend to
10 years and fine - Non-compoundable.
Section 69 of the BNS Act has come into force with effect
from 01.07.2024. Above Section provides that whoever by
deceitful means or by making a promise to marry a woman
without any intention of fulfilling the same, has sexual
intercourse with her, such sexual intercourse not amounting to
the offence of rape, shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and
shall also be liable to fine. The explanation provided under
Section 69 of BNS suggest that deceitful includes the false
promise of employment or promotion, inducement, or marrying
after suppressing identity. Though charge against the present
applicant is not under Section 63 of BNS which provides for
rape, however, it would be appropriate to refer Section 120 of
the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 which provides
presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecution
for rape. The presumption provides that where sexual
intercourse by the accused is proved and the question is
whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to
have been raped and such woman states in her evidence
before the Court that she did not consent, the Court shall
presume that she did not consent. It is true that as per the
Page 6 of 10
Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Fri May 08 2026 Downloaded on : Mon May 11 12:17:55 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/7256/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
decision rendered by the Apex Court which was relied upon by
the learned advocate for the applicant, the Apex Court has
drawn clear distinction between false promise of marriage
which is given on understanding by maker that it would be
broken and breach of promise which is made in good faith, but
subsequently not fulfilled. It is the former which outrightly
attracts the penal provision. It is not the case of the applicant
that some ceremonies were performed or due to the
circumstances which were beyond the control of the applicant,
he was unable to marry the victim though he actually wanted
to marry.
6. This Court has referred the decision rendered by the
Apex Court in the case of Deepak Gulati Vs. State of
Haryana reported in (2013) 7 SCC 675 . The relevant
paragraphs are reproduced hereinbelow:
"21. Consent may be express or implied, coerced or misguided,
obtained willingly or through deceit. Consent is an act of reason,
accompanied by deliberation, the mind weighing, as in a balance,
the good and evil on each side. There is a clear distinction between
rape and consensual sex and in a case like this, the court must very
carefully examine whether the accused had actually wanted to
marry the victim, or had mala fide motives, and had made a false
promise to this effect only to satisfy his lust, as the latter falls within
the ambit of cheating or deception. There is a distinction between
the mere breach of a promise, and not fulfilling a false promise.
Thus, the court must examine whether there was made, at an early
stage a false promise of marriage by the accused; and whether the
consent involved was given after wholly, understanding the nature
and consequences of sexual indulgence. There may be a case
Page 7 of 10
Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Fri May 08 2026 Downloaded on : Mon May 11 12:17:55 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/7256/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
where the prosecutrix agrees to have sexual intercourse on account
of her love and passion for the accused, and not solely on account
of misrepresentation made to her by the accused, or where an
accused on account of circumstances which he could not have
foreseen, or which were beyond his control, was unable to marry
her, despite having every intention to do so. Such cases must be
treated differently. An accused can be convicted for rape only if the
court reaches a conclusion that the intention of the accused was
mala fide, and that he had clandestine motives.
24. Hence, it is evident that there must be adequate evidence to
show that at the relevant time, i.e. at initial stage itself, the accused
had no intention whatsoever, of keeping his promise to marry the
victim. There may, of course, be circumstances, when a person
having the best of intentions is unable to marry the victim owing to
various unavoidable circumstances. The “failure to keep a promise
made with respect to a future uncertain date, due to reasons that
are not very clear from the evidence available, does not always
amount to misconception of fact. In order to come within the
meaning of the term misconception of fact, the fact must have an
immediate relevance.” Section 90 IPC cannot be called into aid in
such a situation, to pardon the act of a girl in entirety, and fasten
criminal liability on the other, unless the court is assured of the fact
that from the very beginning, the accused had never really intended
to marry her."
7. As per the recital of the FIR, the complainant was kept in
the room from 12.02.2022 to 14.02.2024, and the promise to
marry with her in the month of December 2024, the applicant
indulged into physical relations. Subsequently, it was informed
that the mother of the applicant is not agreed with the
Page 8 of 10
Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Fri May 08 2026 Downloaded on : Mon May 11 12:17:55 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/7256/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
relations the applicant denied to marry with the victim.
Whether this act or the explanation can suggest that the
applicant really wanted to marry with the victim or had
malafide motives? It emerges from the allegations that only to
satisfy his lust the false promise of marriage was given to the
complainant though he had no intention to marry with her.
Merely giving the explanation that mother is not agreed for the
marriage cannot be considered to be bonafide reason or the
circumstances which is beyond the control of the applicant. It
is the applicant who before indulging into the relations could
have taken the sense of the mother, however, denying
subsequently smokes of malafide motive of the applicant. The
investigation is at large, the applicant is staying at Zambia, did
not cooperate with the investigation. Further, the judgments
relied upon by the learned advocate Mr. Popat for the applicant
are on different facts, and therefore, they all are
distinguishable, and would not render any help in getting
favourable order. In that background, interference at this stage
would amount to abuse of process of law which may result into
failure of justice. This Court has also referred the decision
rendered by the Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana
Vs. Bhajanlal & Ors reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 , wherein
it is held that the scope of ambit of the powers of the High
Court invoking under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or 528 of BNSS are
very wide, but should be exercised with such circumspection
and in the rarest of the rare and appropriate cases. The powers
do not confer arbitrary jurisdiction to act according to whims
and caprices and is used to prevent the abuse of process of
law and for procuring the ends of justice. The power has to be
exercised under the expression of rarest of the rare case. This
Page 9 of 10
Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Fri May 08 2026 Downloaded on : Mon May 11 12:17:55 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/7256/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
Court do not find any reasons to exercise the power provided
under the law under Section 528 of the BNSS Act. Resultantly,
the present application is dismissed being devoid of merits.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
AMIT ITALIAN
Page 10 of 10
Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Fri May 08 2026 Downloaded on : Mon May 11 12:17:55 IST 2026