Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Kuldeep Mathur, J.
Arpit Naraniwal and Anr. – Petitioners
versus
State of Rajasthan, Through Pp and Anr. – Respondents
S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No.7935 of 2024 Connected with S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.)
No.7570 of 2024 and S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No.2324 of 2025
Decided on 3.6.2025
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Inherent Jurisdiction – Exercise of – Powers conferred upon High Courts under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Section 528 BNSS, 2023) should not be exercised in a routine manner – Inherent powers of quashing criminal proceedings at its inception should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and in rarest of rare cases – High Courts should use inherent powers cautiously and sparingly particularly when, FIR against accused person discloses commission of a cognizable offences. (Para 33)
(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 323 and 376(2)(n) read with Section 90 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Sexual intercourse on false pretext of marriage – FIR – Quashing petitions – Misconception of fact – Unambiguous stance of complainants is that petitioner with intention to deceive complainants to enter into physical relationship, obtained their consent under fictitious assurance of marriage, which is not valid consent as per Section 90 IPC – It is highly probable that complainants of impugned FIRs owing to embarrassment and on being continuously promised by petitioner that he would solemnize marriage with complainants, did not report the matter to police authorities as they were under bonafide belief that petitioner would keep his promise of performing marriage – Possibility of petitioner obtaining consent for sexual relations from complainants under misconception of fact cannot be ruled out – This Court while exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC (Section 528 BNSS) cannot minutely go into correctness of allegations levelled against petitioner – Impugned FIRs cannot be labelled as false/frivolous FIRs which have been lodged with intention of wreak vengeance or with ulterior motives – Quashing petitions dismissed. (Paras 39, 40, 44 and 45)
Result: Criminal Misc. Petitions dismissed.
ORDER
By this common order, challenge laid by the petitioners to three different FIRs under various sections of IPC, 1860 (BNS, 2023) are being decided together.
Brief facts giving rise to S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.7570/2024 read as under:
2. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made by the petitioner to quash and set aside the FIR No.0115/2024 dated 06.02.2024 registered at PS:- Pratap Nagar, Bhilwara, District:- Bhilwara at the instance of the respondent No.2- ‘S’.
3. In the impugned FIR, it has been alleged that the petitioner met with the complainant- respondent No.2 about 06-07 years prior to the date of the lodging of the FIR and started following and pressurizing her to become his friend. When the respondent No.2 did not agree to the proposal of the petitioner’s friendship, the petitioner in order to entrap the complainant, gave her fictitious assurance of marriage and established physical relations with her in Landmark Hotel. As per the FIR, the petitioner thereafter, on multiple occasions made physical relations with the complainant on a false pretext of marriage. In the meantime, the complainant-respondent No.2 continued to request the petitioner to solemnize marriage with her as she developed and maintained consensual relationship purely because of alleged promise made by the petitioner to marry her.
4. In the FIR, it has been stated that the petitioner avoided the multiple requests so made by the complainant and therefore, in these compelling circumstances, the respondent No.2- ‘S’ decided to end her life by consuming heavy dosage of sleeping pills. The complainant was admitted in the Hospital on 15.01.2024. The petitioner after the complainant was discharge from the Hospital, on 19.01.2024, took her to Sessions Court, Bhilwara and purchased one stamp paper in her name and got some material typed. The signatures of the complainant were also obtained by the petitioner on the aforesaid document without allowing her to go through the contents of the document. When the complainant requested the petitioner to hand over a copy of the said document, she came to know that the documents indicating live-in relations between the petitioner and the complainant have got prepared by the petitioner.
5. In these circumstances, the complainant- ‘S’ went to the house of the petitioner and met with the petitioner’s father. The complainant informed the petitioner’s father that how and under what circumstances, she developed consensual relationship with the petitioner. The father of the petitioner thereupon, told the complainant- ‘S’ that she should stay away from his son i.e. the petitioner herein.
6. On receiving the information about commission of crime, the police officials of PS:- Pratap Nagar Bhilwara, District Bhilwara registered the impugned FIR against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 323 and 376(2)(n) of the IPC.
Brief facts giving rise to S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.7935/2024 read as under:
7. In this criminal misc. petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the FIR No.0076/2024 dated 19.03.2024, registered against him at PS- Sadar Bhilwara, District:- Bhilwara by the respondent No.2- ‘A’ alleging interalia that she came in contact with the petitioner in the year 2020. The petitioner and respondent No.2- ‘A’ developed liking for each other. In the year 2021, the petitioner took respondent No.2- ‘A’ in a resort where he developed physical relationship with her on the false pretext of marriage. In the impugned FIR, it has further been alleged that the petitioner continued relationship with respondent No.2 by assuring her that he would marry her in due course of time. Later on, the respondent No.2 came to know that the petitioner is a drug addict and has been sent to the rehabilitation centre.
8. The complainant -respondent No.2 in the FIR, has further alleged that in the month of May-June, 2023, the petitioner again contacted the respondent No.2- ‘A’ an
Sexual intercourse on false pretext of marriage – Consent obtained under misconception of fact is not a valid consent.
Consent obtained under false promises of marriage is invalid under Section 90 IPC, warranting further investigation into allegations of sexual offences.
The inherent powers of the court can quash criminal proceedings when the victim expresses no desire to proceed, especially following reconciliation and marriage, despite serious charges under IPC.
(1) Exercise of inherent jurisdiction – High Court does not have to go in detail by way of minute examination about correctness or otherwise of facts alleged – Court has to examine the same by taking....
It is necessary to examine FIR, statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. before Judicial Magistrate First Class to find out correct factual matrix of issue - Sum and substance of decis....
The court held that the FIR for rape was quashed as the relationship was consensual, and continuation of proceedings would cause undue prejudice, affirming the importance of consent and the role of c....
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
