Uttarakhand High Court quashes rape case, holding that a relationship turning sour does not by itself create criminal liability

The revisionist and the complainant met through a matrimonial website in April 2023 and entered into a relationship. The complainant alleged that they had sexual relations during trips to Rishikesh and Coorg; she later complained and sought action under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, after which an FIR was registered under Section 376 IPC.

The Sessions Court rejected the revisionist’s discharge application and directed that a charge under Section 376 IPC be framed.

The revisionist challenged that order, arguing that the allegations described consensual relations between adults.

The High Court condoned the delay in filing the revision.

Whether the allegations in the FIR, taken at face value, disclosed an offence of rape under Section 376 IPC

Whether the Sessions Court’s refusal to discharge the revisionist and direction to frame a charge should be set aside

Section 375 IPC defines rape by reference to specified sexual acts and circumstances, including acts against a woman’s will or without her consent; its explanation defines consent as an unequivocal voluntary agreement to participate in the specific sexual act. Section 376 IPC prescribes punishment for rape.

At the charge stage, the court must determine whether the material discloses a prima facie case and should not conduct a mini-trial or meticulously weigh the evidence; however, the revisionist argued that legally sustainable material must support the charge.

The High Court treated the parties as educated adults who had voluntarily entered a relationship after meeting through a matrimonial website and considered them capable of understanding the nature and consequences of their actions.

It noted that the alleged incidents occurred while they were travelling together to tourist destinations, including Coorg with common friends, and that the complainant made no protest or prompt complaint after those incidents. On that basis, the Court characterized the matter as a consensual relationship that had ended, observing that the failure of a relationship alone does not create criminal liability. It concluded that the charge under Section 376 IPC should not proceed.

The High Court quashed the proceedings in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 2024 against the revisionist.