Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Vineet Saran, J.K. Maheshwari, JJ.
Jatin Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 456 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP (Criminal) No. 9568 of 2021)
Decided On : 21-03-2022
Quashing of FIR - Marriage - IPC Sections 417, 420, 376 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
An FIR was lodged against the appellant for offences under Sections 417, 420, and 376 IPC alleging that the appellant made physical relationship with the respondent no.2 on the promise to marry. However, the appellant and the respondent no.2 got married on 23.09.2020.
Finding of the Court:
The respondent no.2, who had lodged the FIR, appeared before the court and stated that she is now married to the appellant, leading a happy married life, and does not wish to press the FIR. The court, exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, quashed the FIR lodged by the respondent no.2 against the appellant.
Issues: Validity of the FIR lodged against the appellant under Sections 417, 420, and 376 IPC, and the impact of the subsequent marriage between the appellant and the respondent no.2 on the FIR.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the subsequent marriage between the appellant and the respondent no.2, the statement of the respondent no.2, and the exercise of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India in quashing the FIR.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the court quashed the FIR dated 16.08.2020 lodged by the respondent no.2 against the appellant under Sections 417, 420, and 376 IPC.
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. An FIR was lodged against the appellant by the respondent no.2 for offences under Sections 417, 420 and 376 IPC alleging that the respondent no.2 was introduced to the petitioner through Bharat Matrimony and thereafter they remained in touch with each other. It was alleged that on the promise to marry, the appellant made physical relationship with respondent no.2. Thereafter, since the appellant refused to marry, the FIR was lodged by the respondent no.2. However, it is not disputed that on 23.09.2020, the appellant and the respondent no.2 have got married, for which marriage certificate has also been issued on the same date.
3. The appellant then filed an application for quashing of the FIR. The High Court dismissed the petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal by way of special leave petition has been filed.
4. On earlier occasion, this Court directed the respondent no.2 to be present through video-conferencing. Today, respondent no.2, namely, Ms. T. Harshini appeared through video-conferencing, who has been duly identified by Mr. Saivamshi V., leaned counsel. Respondent no.2 has made a statement that it is correct that she is now married to the appellant and leading a happy married life and has also made a statement that she does not wish to press the FIR lodged against the appellant.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and keeping in view that the respondent no.2/complainant has herself made a statement before us that she has married the appellant and now living happily, we exercise our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and to do complete justice in the matter, we quash the FIR dated 16.08.2020 lodged by the respondent no.2 against the appellant under Sections 417, 420 and 376 IPC.
6. The appeal stands allowed accordingly.
The subsequent marriage between the accused and the complainant, along with the complainant's statement, can be considered by the court in exercising its powers to quash an FIR under Article 142 of t....
FIR quashed - Offence of Rape - FIR should not be quashed in case of rape as it is a heinous offence, but when complainant/prosecutrix herself takes initiative and states that she wants to give quiet....
The court can quash FIRs in cases of alleged sexual offences if the complainant unequivocally expresses a desire to resolve disputes amicably after marriage, indicating no public interest in continui....
Court may quash FIR for serious offenses if complainant reconciles with the accused and expresses no desire to proceed, thereby conserving judicial resources.
The court's power under Section 482 Cr.P.C can be exercised to prevent the abuse of legal process and secure the ends of justice, particularly in cases involving love affairs and subsequent marriage.
Consensual sexual intercourse is not rape.
Amicable settlement between parties - False promise to marry - Seeks quash of FIR - A breach of a promise cannot be said to be a false promise - To establish a false promise maker of promise should h....
In cases where the parties are in a consensual relationship and have arrived at a settlement, the court may quash the FIR and proceedings if the continuation of the proceedings would serve no useful ....
The court may quash an FIR when the parties reach an amicable settlement and the complainant does not object, indicating no useful purpose in prosecution.
Consent under false promise of marriage does not constitute an offense unless it can be established that the promise was false from the beginning.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
