2025 Supreme(SC) 1667

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.B.PARDIWALA, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani – Appellants
VERSUS
The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 3831 of 2025 (@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 11642 of 2019)
Decided On : 02-09-2025

IMPORTANT POINTRape – There is clear distinction between rape and consensual sex – Summoning any person on the basis of a frivolous or vexatious complaint is something very serious.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 323, 504, 376, 452, 377 and 120B read with Section 3(1)(10) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Hurt, rape, house trespass and conspiracy – Summoning order – Complaint fails to disclose date of incident including place of incident – Summoning any person on the basis of a frivolous or vexatious complaint is something very serious – This would tarnish image of person against whom false, frivolous and vexatious allegations are levelled – There is clear distinction between rape and consensual sex – In a case where there is a promise of marriage, Court must very carefully examine whether accused had actually wanted to marry victim, or had mala fide motives and had made a false promise to this effect only to satisfy his lust, as latter falls in ambit of cheating or deception – Fact that complainant thought fit not to even accept notice issued by Court is one additional ground that she was not at all serious right from day one – Continuation of criminal proceedings against appellant would be nothing but gross abuse of process of law – High Court should have exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of criminal proceedings – Criminal proceedings quashed. (Paras 15, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23 and 24)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Quashing petition – Steps – Step one, whether material relied upon by accused is sound, reasonable, and indubitable, i.e., materials is of sterling and impeccable quality – Step two, whether material relied upon by accused, would rule out assertions contained in charges levelled against accused, i.e., material is sufficient to reject and overrule factual assertions contained in complaint, i.e., material is such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn factual basis of accusations as false – Step three, whether material relied upon by the accused, has not been refuted by the prosecution/complainant; and/or the material is such, that it cannot be justifiably refuted by the prosecution/complainant – Step four, whether proceeding with the trial would result in an abuse of process of the court, and would not serve the ends of justice? – If answer to all steps is in affirmative, judicial conscience of High Court should persuade it to quash such criminal proceedings, in exercise of power vested in it under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. (Para 20)

Facts of the case:

Present appeal arises from the order passed by High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 12.09.2019 in Application under Section by which petition filed by the appellant herein seeking to quash the summoning order dated 25.08.2015 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.8, Allahabad came to be dismissed.

Findings of Court:

Impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside. The proceedings of Criminal Case No.655/2014 pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate are hereby quashed.

Issues: Key issues included the validity of the complaint after an extended delay, the credibility of allegations made, and whether criminal proceedings constituted an abuse of process.

Ratio Decidendi: The court established parameters for quashing proceedings in cases of vexatious complaints, emphasizing a comprehensive review of circumstances beyond mere allegation. The prolonged delay was deemed detrimental to the complaint's credibility.

Result: Appeal allowed, proceedings quashed.