1. FIR for cheating and rape based on promise of marriage — subsequent marriage of parties — petition for quashing of FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Para 2 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 1389
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
Important Points
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 the Constitution of India.
Subject
Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR
Act Referred
Headnote
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.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
Mr. Prateek Tewari, Advocate, Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Govind Goyal, Advocate, Mr. Tungesh, Advocate, For the Appellant / Ms. Bina Madhavan, Advocate, Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Advocate, Ms. Sweena Nair, Advocate, Mr. P. Mohith Rao, Advocate, For the Respondent.
Mr. Prateek Tewari, Advocate, Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Govind Goyal, Advocate, Mr. Tungesh, Advocate, For the Appellant / Ms. Bina Madhavan, Advocate, Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Advocate, Ms. Sweena Nair, Advocate, Mr. P. Mohith Rao, Advocate, For the Respondent.
Table of Contents
2. Appellant sought quashing of FIR following subsequent marriage; High Court dismissed the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Para 3 )
3. Complainant stated she is now married to the appellant, living happily, and does not wish to press the FIR. (Para 4 , 5 )
4. The Supreme Court may exercise powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to quash an FIR to do complete justice. (Para 5 )
5. FIR under Sections 417, 420, and 376 IPC quashed; appeal allowed. (Para 5 , 6 )
6. Under what circumstances can the Supreme Court quash an FIR to do complete justice?
The Supreme Court can exercise its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to quash an FIR, particularly when the complainant has married the accused and expressed a desire not to press the charges. (Para 4 , 5 )
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.
