Full Judgment Text
2025 INSC 1499
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.5256 OF 2025
SANDEEP SINGH THAKUR ...APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
& ANOTHER ...RESPONDENTS
J U D G M E N T
NAGARATHNA, J.
Leave granted.
2. Being aggrieved by the order dated 05.04.2024 passed
on IA No.9352 of 2024 in CRA No.4869 of 2024 by which the
application filed by the appellant herein seeking suspension of
sentence was rejected, this appeal has been preferred.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
BORRA LM VALLI
Date: 2025.12.24
12:45:57 IST
Reason:
1
3. This is one of those rare cases where on the intervention
of this Court the appellant herein, who had applied to seek
suspension of his sentence was ultimately benefitted by
quashing of his conviction as well as the sentence. This is
owing to the fact that when the matter came up before this
Court by assailing the rejection of suspension of sentence by
the High Court, on a consideration of the facts of the case, we
had a sixth sense that the appellant and the respondent
prosecutrix could be brought together once again if they
decided to marry each other. Therefore, we suggested to the
counsel for the respective parties to seek instructions. The
appellant as well as the respondent prosecutrix appeared
before this Court. We interacted with them in presence of their
parents in our Chamber and on hearing them, we were
informed that they were willing to marry each other. Hence, we
granted interim bail to the appellant herein. The marriage
between the parties has taken place on 22.07.2025 and the
parties have been residing together since then. Their parents
are happy by this development.
2
4. Consequently , we have invoked our powers under Article
142 of the Constitution of India to do complete justice in the
matter by quashing the complaint as well as the conviction and
sentence passed against the appellant herein.
5. We think that owing to a misunderstanding the
consensual relationship between the parties was given a
criminal colour and converted into an offence of false promise
of marriage whereas the parties, in fact, intended to marry
each other. It was only owing to the appellant seeking
postponement in the date of marriage which may have led to
insecurity in the mind of the respondent prosecutrix and filing
of the criminal complaint.
6. We are satisfied with the outcome of the case and hence,
we record the same.
7. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant
met the second respondent in 2015 on a social media platform
and both developed a liking and fondness for each other.
Thereafter, both the parties entered into a consensual physical
relationship with each other wherein the second respondent
3
claims that she acted on the alleged false promise of marriage
given to her by the appellant herein. Aggrieved by the non-
fulfillment of the said promise to marry, the second respondent
filed an FIR No.29 of 2011 dated 02.11.2021 under Section 376
and 376(2)(n) of Indian penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter ‘IPC’ for
short). Thereafter a chargesheet was filed on 08.02.2022. The
appellant was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge in
Sessions Trial No.191 of 2022 and was convicted under
Sections 376(2)(n) and 417 of IPC sentencing him to rigorous
imprisonment for ten years and Rs.50,000/- fine for the
offence under Section 376(2)(n) and a rigorous imprisonment
for two years with Rs.5,000/- fine for the offense under Section
417 of IPC.
8. Aggrieved by the said conviction, the appellant preferred
an appeal before Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur in
Criminal Regular Appeal CRA No.4869 of 2024. In said Appeal,
the appellant preferred an I.A. No.9352 of 2024 seeking the
relief of suspension of jail sentence imposed by the Sessions
Judge. The said I.A. No.9352 of 2024 was rejected by the High
Court vide order dated 05.09.2024. Aggrieved by the rejection
4
of the I.A., the appellant has preferred the present Criminal
Appeal.
9.
During the pendency of this appeal, this Court passed
the following orders on 06.05.2025, 15.05.2025 and on
25.07.2025:
“06.05.2025
It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner in the
presence of the mother of the petitioner Smt. Radha that
the petitioner may be willing to marry the second
respondent-Prosecutrix.
In the circumstances, we direct that the petitioner
accused to be brought before this court by the first
respondent-State police. The second respondent-
Prosecutrix to also to be present before this court.
List on 15.05.2025.
The parties are directed to appear at 11:30 AM before
this court.
15.05.2025
Having regard to the sensitivity of the matter, we
directed the parties as well as their parent along with their
respective learned counsel and learned standing counsel
for the State of Madhya Pradesh to appear before us in
Chamber.
They have appeared before us in Chamber in the pre-
lunch Session.
We heard them.
We passed over the matter so as to enable the
petitioner and respondent No.2 (parties) to have a dialogue
and inform the Court as to whether they are inclined to get
engaged and be married to each other.
5
In the post-lunch Session, the matter was again called
in the Court hall.
The petitioner and respondent No.2 have
unequivocally stated before us that they are willing to
marry each other. The details of their marriage shall be
worked out by their respective parents and we hope that
the marriage takes place as expeditiously as possible.
In the above circumstances, we suspend the sentence
and release the petitioner on bail.
Today, the petitioner has appeared before this Court
pursuant to our direction dated 06.05.2025. He shall
return to jail and shall be produced before the concerned
Sessions Court as early as possible.
The concerned Sessions Court shall release him on
bail, subject to such conditions as it may deem appropriate
to impose.
Having regard to the aforesaid developments, the
matter is adjourned to 25.07.2025.
The matter shall be treated as part-heard.
25.07.2025
We have heard learned counsel for the respective
parties viz., petitioner and respondent No.2 herein as well
as learned counsel for respondent No.1-State in the
presence of petitioner and respondent No.2. Pursuant to
the order this court dated 15.05.2025, the parties through
their counsel submitted that they have since married
inasmuch their marriage took place on 22.07.2025 and
they are living together. In the above circumstances,
learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
conviction in the instant case may be stayed while the
petitioner is already on bail so as to enable the petitioner
to rejoin government service and report for duty. Learned
counsel appearing for the respondent(s)-State submitted
that appropriate orders may be made having regard to the
developments in the case. In the circumstances, we stay
the order of conviction dated 12.04.2024 passed by the
First Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar’s Third Additional
Judge Sagar (M.P.), in ST No.191/2022 pending further
6
orders having regard to the aforesaid developments in the
case so as to enable the petitioner to report for duty.”
10. Having regard to the aforesaid orders and compliances,
we directed that the parties along with their respective counsel
be present before this Court.
11. It is submitted that since the parties are residing
together, the second respondent-wife of the appellant
submitted that the criminal proceedings that she had initiated
as against the appellant herein may not be continued and in
fact they may be quashed.
12. Learned counsel for the appellant as well as the second
respondent also submitted that the appellant and the second
respondent are since married and residing together, in the
interest of justice criminal proceedings may be quashed.
13. Learned counsel for the standing counsel for the first
respondent-state submitted that having regard to the facts of
this case, appropriate orders may be made in this appeal.
14. Taking note of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties and the developments that
7
have taken place in this appeal, we think interest of justice
would be sub-served if the FIR No. 29 of 2021 dated
02.11.2021 lodged with Women Police Station, District Sagar
and the judgment of the I Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar
and the order of conviction and sentence passed
dated12.04.2024 therein, stand quashed.
15.
Consequently, CRA No.4869 of 2024 pending on the file
of the Madhya Pradesh High Court is rendered infructuous.
16. While passing the aforesaid directions, we have invoked
our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, in
the interest of justice and to do complete justice in the matter.
17. The said appeal also stands disposed of in the aforesaid
terms.
18.
At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant
submitted that the appellant was suspended from service
owing to the criminal complaint and proceeding against him as
well as the conviction and sentence imposed on him by the
Trial Court. In view of this order, a direction may be issued to
the Chief Medical Officer (CMO), Sagar, Madhya Pradesh to
8
revoke the order of suspension and to pay the arrears of salary
to the appellant.
19. Learned standing counsel for the first respondent–State
to convey this order to the concerned officer for the purpose of
payment of the arrears of salary on revocation of the order of
suspension since the appellant has joined duty pursuant to
revocation of the order of suspension. The arrears shall be paid
to the appellant within the period of two months from today.
20. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
….…………………………………,J.
(B.V. NAGARATHNA)
….…………………………………,J.
(SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA)
NEW DELHI;
DECEMBER 5, 2025
9
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.5256 OF 2025
SANDEEP SINGH THAKUR ...APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
& ANOTHER ...RESPONDENTS
J U D G M E N T
NAGARATHNA, J.
Leave granted.
2. Being aggrieved by the order dated 05.04.2024 passed
on IA No.9352 of 2024 in CRA No.4869 of 2024 by which the
application filed by the appellant herein seeking suspension of
sentence was rejected, this appeal has been preferred.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
BORRA LM VALLI
Date: 2025.12.24
12:45:57 IST
Reason:
1
3. This is one of those rare cases where on the intervention
of this Court the appellant herein, who had applied to seek
suspension of his sentence was ultimately benefitted by
quashing of his conviction as well as the sentence. This is
owing to the fact that when the matter came up before this
Court by assailing the rejection of suspension of sentence by
the High Court, on a consideration of the facts of the case, we
had a sixth sense that the appellant and the respondent
prosecutrix could be brought together once again if they
decided to marry each other. Therefore, we suggested to the
counsel for the respective parties to seek instructions. The
appellant as well as the respondent prosecutrix appeared
before this Court. We interacted with them in presence of their
parents in our Chamber and on hearing them, we were
informed that they were willing to marry each other. Hence, we
granted interim bail to the appellant herein. The marriage
between the parties has taken place on 22.07.2025 and the
parties have been residing together since then. Their parents
are happy by this development.
2
4. Consequently , we have invoked our powers under Article
142 of the Constitution of India to do complete justice in the
matter by quashing the complaint as well as the conviction and
sentence passed against the appellant herein.
5. We think that owing to a misunderstanding the
consensual relationship between the parties was given a
criminal colour and converted into an offence of false promise
of marriage whereas the parties, in fact, intended to marry
each other. It was only owing to the appellant seeking
postponement in the date of marriage which may have led to
insecurity in the mind of the respondent prosecutrix and filing
of the criminal complaint.
6. We are satisfied with the outcome of the case and hence,
we record the same.
7. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant
met the second respondent in 2015 on a social media platform
and both developed a liking and fondness for each other.
Thereafter, both the parties entered into a consensual physical
relationship with each other wherein the second respondent
3
claims that she acted on the alleged false promise of marriage
given to her by the appellant herein. Aggrieved by the non-
fulfillment of the said promise to marry, the second respondent
filed an FIR No.29 of 2011 dated 02.11.2021 under Section 376
and 376(2)(n) of Indian penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter ‘IPC’ for
short). Thereafter a chargesheet was filed on 08.02.2022. The
appellant was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge in
Sessions Trial No.191 of 2022 and was convicted under
Sections 376(2)(n) and 417 of IPC sentencing him to rigorous
imprisonment for ten years and Rs.50,000/- fine for the
offence under Section 376(2)(n) and a rigorous imprisonment
for two years with Rs.5,000/- fine for the offense under Section
417 of IPC.
8. Aggrieved by the said conviction, the appellant preferred
an appeal before Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur in
Criminal Regular Appeal CRA No.4869 of 2024. In said Appeal,
the appellant preferred an I.A. No.9352 of 2024 seeking the
relief of suspension of jail sentence imposed by the Sessions
Judge. The said I.A. No.9352 of 2024 was rejected by the High
Court vide order dated 05.09.2024. Aggrieved by the rejection
4
of the I.A., the appellant has preferred the present Criminal
Appeal.
9.
During the pendency of this appeal, this Court passed
the following orders on 06.05.2025, 15.05.2025 and on
25.07.2025:
“06.05.2025
It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner in the
presence of the mother of the petitioner Smt. Radha that
the petitioner may be willing to marry the second
respondent-Prosecutrix.
In the circumstances, we direct that the petitioner
accused to be brought before this court by the first
respondent-State police. The second respondent-
Prosecutrix to also to be present before this court.
List on 15.05.2025.
The parties are directed to appear at 11:30 AM before
this court.
15.05.2025
Having regard to the sensitivity of the matter, we
directed the parties as well as their parent along with their
respective learned counsel and learned standing counsel
for the State of Madhya Pradesh to appear before us in
Chamber.
They have appeared before us in Chamber in the pre-
lunch Session.
We heard them.
We passed over the matter so as to enable the
petitioner and respondent No.2 (parties) to have a dialogue
and inform the Court as to whether they are inclined to get
engaged and be married to each other.
5
In the post-lunch Session, the matter was again called
in the Court hall.
The petitioner and respondent No.2 have
unequivocally stated before us that they are willing to
marry each other. The details of their marriage shall be
worked out by their respective parents and we hope that
the marriage takes place as expeditiously as possible.
In the above circumstances, we suspend the sentence
and release the petitioner on bail.
Today, the petitioner has appeared before this Court
pursuant to our direction dated 06.05.2025. He shall
return to jail and shall be produced before the concerned
Sessions Court as early as possible.
The concerned Sessions Court shall release him on
bail, subject to such conditions as it may deem appropriate
to impose.
Having regard to the aforesaid developments, the
matter is adjourned to 25.07.2025.
The matter shall be treated as part-heard.
25.07.2025
We have heard learned counsel for the respective
parties viz., petitioner and respondent No.2 herein as well
as learned counsel for respondent No.1-State in the
presence of petitioner and respondent No.2. Pursuant to
the order this court dated 15.05.2025, the parties through
their counsel submitted that they have since married
inasmuch their marriage took place on 22.07.2025 and
they are living together. In the above circumstances,
learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
conviction in the instant case may be stayed while the
petitioner is already on bail so as to enable the petitioner
to rejoin government service and report for duty. Learned
counsel appearing for the respondent(s)-State submitted
that appropriate orders may be made having regard to the
developments in the case. In the circumstances, we stay
the order of conviction dated 12.04.2024 passed by the
First Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar’s Third Additional
Judge Sagar (M.P.), in ST No.191/2022 pending further
6
orders having regard to the aforesaid developments in the
case so as to enable the petitioner to report for duty.”
10. Having regard to the aforesaid orders and compliances,
we directed that the parties along with their respective counsel
be present before this Court.
11. It is submitted that since the parties are residing
together, the second respondent-wife of the appellant
submitted that the criminal proceedings that she had initiated
as against the appellant herein may not be continued and in
fact they may be quashed.
12. Learned counsel for the appellant as well as the second
respondent also submitted that the appellant and the second
respondent are since married and residing together, in the
interest of justice criminal proceedings may be quashed.
13. Learned counsel for the standing counsel for the first
respondent-state submitted that having regard to the facts of
this case, appropriate orders may be made in this appeal.
14. Taking note of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties and the developments that
7
have taken place in this appeal, we think interest of justice
would be sub-served if the FIR No. 29 of 2021 dated
02.11.2021 lodged with Women Police Station, District Sagar
and the judgment of the I Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar
and the order of conviction and sentence passed
dated12.04.2024 therein, stand quashed.
15.
Consequently, CRA No.4869 of 2024 pending on the file
of the Madhya Pradesh High Court is rendered infructuous.
16. While passing the aforesaid directions, we have invoked
our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, in
the interest of justice and to do complete justice in the matter.
17. The said appeal also stands disposed of in the aforesaid
terms.
18.
At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant
submitted that the appellant was suspended from service
owing to the criminal complaint and proceeding against him as
well as the conviction and sentence imposed on him by the
Trial Court. In view of this order, a direction may be issued to
the Chief Medical Officer (CMO), Sagar, Madhya Pradesh to
8
revoke the order of suspension and to pay the arrears of salary
to the appellant.
19. Learned standing counsel for the first respondent–State
to convey this order to the concerned officer for the purpose of
payment of the arrears of salary on revocation of the order of
suspension since the appellant has joined duty pursuant to
revocation of the order of suspension. The arrears shall be paid
to the appellant within the period of two months from today.
20. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
….…………………………………,J.
(B.V. NAGARATHNA)
….…………………………………,J.
(SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA)
NEW DELHI;
DECEMBER 5, 2025
9