A prolonged consensual relationship between adults, without more, does not constitute rape after marriage fails.

The applicant sought quashing under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, of FIR C.R. No. I-132 of 2017 registered at Valsad Town Police Station for offences under Sections 376 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

The first informant, a 31-year-old divorced woman serving as a Lady Police Constable in the RPF, alleged that the applicant, a GRP Constable, represented himself as unmarried, promised to marry her, and established physical relations with her on several occasions and at different places between approximately June 2012 and 2017.

She alleged that the applicant avoided marriage, abused her, and that she discovered his existing marriage only after an altercation with his wife on 6 August 2017.

The applicant contended that the relationship was consensual, that the informant knew he was married, and that the FIR was false and motivated.

Photographs, including one showing the informant with the applicant and his wife at the applicant’s son’s birthday celebration, were placed on record; police reports stated that the photographs were genuine and that statements of persons appearing in them had been recorded.

Whether the allegations in the FIR, taken at face value, disclosed the offence of rape under Section 376 IPC where the parties, both adults, had maintained a physical relationship for more than five years on an alleged promise of marriage?

Whether the material on record, including the photographs and the parties’ conduct, demonstrated a consensual relationship and justified exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR?

Whether the alleged failure to marry, by itself, converted the prolonged consensual relationship into a criminal offence under Section 376 IPC?

The Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to prevent abuse of the process of law and to secure the ends of justice.

The FIR invoked Sections 376 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Court applied the principle that, at the quashing stage, it must ordinarily assess the allegations on their face and must not conduct a mini-trial; however, material of unimpeachable character placed before the Court may be considered in an appropriate case.

It further applied the principle that a consensual physical relationship between two adults does not become rape merely because the relationship subsequently fails or the accused does not marry the complainant, unless the prosecution prima facie establishes that consent was obtained solely because of a false promise of marriage from the inception.

The Court noted that both parties were adults, both were serving as Railway Police Constables, and their relationship continued for more than five years.

The prolonged association and repeated physical relations at different places were inconsistent, at the prima facie stage, with the allegation that the informant’s consent had been obtained solely by an immediately false promise of marriage.

The Court also considered the genuine photographs, particularly the photograph showing the informant with the applicant’s wife, as supporting the applicant’s contention that the informant was aware of his marital status.

The informant did not specifically deny her presence at the applicant’s residence or the photographs placed on record.

On these circumstances, the Court found that the prosecution had not prima facie demonstrated absence of free consent or that the physical relationship was induced exclusively by a false promise of marriage.

The subsequent breakdown of the relationship and failure to solemnize marriage could not, by themselves, constitute rape.

The application under Section 482 CrPC was allowed, and FIR C.R. No. I-132 of 2017 registered with Valsad Town Police Station, together with all consequential proceedings, was quashed and set aside qua the applicant.

The rule was made absolute, and direct service was permitted.