In cases of consensual relationships, if no false promises of marriage were made and both parties were aware of each other's circumstances, allegations of rape may not stand under Section 376 IPC.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

Heard the parties.

2. Though, notice has validly been served upon the opposite party no.2 yet, no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in spite of repeated calls.

3. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Lesliganj P.S. Case No.39 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.09 of 2023 including the order taking cognizance dated 23.11.2023 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau whereby and where under the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau has taken cognizance for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner basing upon the charge sheet submitted by the police.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge has not yet been framed in this case and the case is fixed on 04.02.2026 for consideration of framing of charge.

5. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is though was a married person, still he was in love with the informant for about one year before lodging of the FIR and in the meanwhile, the informant became pregnant and after pregnancy continued for six months, the petitioner took the informant to keep her with him at Ranchi and kept the informant at Ranchi Railway Station for some days and when the informant become suspicious that she has been duped, she fled away from there.

6. On the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, police registered Lesliganj P.S. Case No.39 of 2023 and took up investigation of the case and consequent upon submission of charge sheet, cognizance has been taken.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case ofLalu Yadav vs The State of Uttar Pradesh & Others reported in2024 INSC 782, wherein para-13, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India relied upon its own judgement in the case ofNaim Ahamed vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in2023 SCC OnLine SC 89 wherein in the facts of that case of alleged rape on false promise of marriage, made five years after the complainant and the accused started having relations and even the complainant got pregnant from the accused, while the lady was having a subsisting marriage, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the prosecutrix had given her consent for sexual relationship and quashed the entire criminal proceeding.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner next relies upon the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Vijayan vs. State of Kerala reported in(2008) 14 SCC 763, wherein in the facts of that case where the incident took place seven months prior to the date of lodging the complaint and the explanation for delay in lodging the FIR is that the accused promised to marry the informant and it was a case based on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix; in the absence of any medical report nor any DNA test was conducted, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India set aside the judgment of conviction.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner next relies upon the judgment of this Court in the case ofHarishankar Das vs. State of Jharkhand reported in2024: JHHC :38567 and submits that therein this Court relied upon its own judgment in the case ofDeepak Kumar Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr. reported in2023 SCC OnLine Jhar 2967, wherein in paragraph no.8 of that case relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case ofPramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra reported in(2019) 9 SCC 608 andAnurag