Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
RAJNESH OSWAL, J.
Rajinder Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of J&K – Respondent
JUDGMENT
RAJNESH OSWAL, J.
1. This petition has been filed for quashing the FIR No. 38/2018 dated 16.08.2018 registered with Police Station, Panchari, District Udhampur under sections 376 and 506 RPC by respondent No. 1 at the instance of respondent No. 2.
2. It is stated in the petition that false and frivolous FIR without mentioning the date, time and place of occurrence has been registered against the petitioner at the instance of respondent No. 2 and a bare perusal of the same would reveal that no offence is made out against the petitioner, even if, the allegations at their face value, are assumed to be correct. It is also urged by the petitioner that respondent No. 2 has alleged the occurrence to have taken place in the month of June 2011 and the contents of the complaint itself establish that respondent No. 2 has grievance in respect of the broken promise of marriage, though the petitioner denies the same. In the FIR, though it is stated that respondent No. 2 had maintained the relationship with the petitioner for seven years, but the petitioner did not even know respondent No. 2.
3. The petitioner has further tried to demonstrate the falsity of the FIR impugned by submitting tha
A mere breach of promise to marry does not constitute an offence under IPC unless it is shown that the promise was made in bad faith with no intention to adhere to it.
When there is allegation that sexual relationships were made on the basis of false promise of marriage, then it has to be established that promise of marriage was a false promise, given in bad faith ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove that the promise of marriage was false, given in bad faith, and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was g....
The promise to marry must be false from inception to constitute an offence under section 376 IPC; a consensual relationship over time does not amount to rape.
(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....
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
