Petition to quash FIR for rape on promise of marriage dismissed as trial reached final stage.

The petitioner sought to quash FIR No. 73/2022 registered at PS Mahila Thana, Shahdol, for offences under Sections 376 and 376(2)(n) of the IPC.

The complainant (Respondent No. 2) alleged that while they were engaged to be married, the petitioner forced her into physical relations on May 25, 2022, by convincing her of their upcoming marriage.

The complainant filed the FIR on September 4, 2022, after discovering the petitioner had married another woman.

The petitioner challenged the FIR on grounds of a three-month delay, a prior withdrawn dowry complaint, and the subsequent framing of charges.

During the pendency of this petition, the trial reached the stage of final hearing.

1. Whether the FIR and consequential criminal proceedings should be quashed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, despite the trial being at the stage of final hearing.

The Court applied Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

Kamaladevi Agrawal v. State of W.B. (2002) 1 SCC 555, which held that inherent powers to quash should be used sparingly and only if the FIR, taken at face value, discloses no cognizable offence.

R. Kalyani v. Janak C. Mehta (2009) 1 SCC 516 and Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander (2012) 9 SCC 460, establishing that Courts should not conduct a meticulous examination of evidence or marshal records at the quashing stage, especially when the offence is broadly satisfied prima facie.

The Court observed that the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS is intended to prevent the abuse of the process of law, but it cannot be used to resolve disputed and controversial facts which are subject to trial.

In this instance, the petitioner moved the Court after the framing of charges and as the trial neared completion.

The Court found that since the evidence of the parties had already been recorded and the trial was at the "fag end," it would be improper to interfere.

The allegations in the FIR, if taken as true, did disclose the commission of an offence, and any potential benefits from the evidence are matters for the trial court to determine in its final judgment.

The Court directed the trial court to conclude the proceedings at an early date, uninfluenced by any observations made in this order.

No orders were made as to costs.