A consensual relationship does not constitute rape unless it is shown that consent was obtained through deceit or coercion, with no intention of marriage from the beginning.

Judgment :

Savitri Ratho, J.

1. This CRLMC has been filed with the following prayer:-

“The Petitioner therefore most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court be graciously pleased to allow this application and be pleased to quash the impugned FIR vide Annexure-1 and the impugned proceeding registered on the basis of such FIR vide Sukinda C.T. No. 268 of 2024 pending on the files of the Court of learned GN-Cum-JMFC, corresponding to Sukinda P.S. Case No. 138/2024;

And pass such other order/orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstance of the case;

And for this act of kindness the Petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.”

PROSECUTION CASE

2. On 19.04.2024, the victim submitted a written report in the Sukinda Police Station leading to registration of Sukinda P.S. Case No.138 of 2024 under Sections 493 and 376(2)(n) of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (hereinafter referred to as “the IPC”) against the petitioner.

3. The victim had alleged in the FIR that she was aged more than 18 years and was in love with the petitioner since the last one and half years. He had kept physical relations with her and promised to marry her. When she refused to have physical relationship with his friends, he beat her and she escaped from the place. Thereafter their relationship returned to normal. One month back on 28.03.2024, he called her and they again had physical relations and she returned home. The next day he did not receive her call. A few days thereafter, he blocked her number. When she called the petitioner through another number, the petitioner expressed that he doesn’t want to keep any further relation with her. Thereafter she was unable to contact him inspite of her best efforts. Copy of the FIR has been filed as Annexure-1.

4. Statement of the victim under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as “the Cr.P.C.”) was recorded by the Magistrate on 25.04.2024. In the statement, the victim stated that her marriage had been fixed with the petitioner but due to a quarrel, he had blocked her number for which she had made false allegation against him about their relationship, and that she had a quarrel with the petitioner on 17.04.2024 and thereafter she had lodged the FIR making false allegations against the petitioner.

5. The statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. had been called for by this Court during hearing of ABLAPL No. 9070 of 2024 filed by the petitioner and was produced by the learned State Counsel. Its contents were referred to by the Court in its order dated 06.11.2024 vide which the petitioner had been directed to be released on bail on his surrender before the learned Court below. Copy of the order dated 06.11.2024 passed in ABLPL No. 9070 of 2024 has been annexed as Annexure 2 to the CRLMC. Copy of the affidavit dated 24.04.2024 of the victim sworn before the Executive Magistrate has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the CRLMC.

6. On 21.01.2025, notice of this application had been issued to the victim and further proceedings in the case pending in the Court of the learned Gram Nyayalaya -cum- J.M.F.C., Sukinda in C.T. case No 268 of 2024 corresponding to Sukinda P.S. Case No. 138 of 2024, had been stayed. On a subsequent date, the copy of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. had been called for by this Court in a sealed cover and was produced. Mr. Panchanan Panigrahi, learned Counsel has entered appearance on behalf of the victim. The name of the victim is not being mentioned to protect her identity.

SUBMISSIONS

7. I have heard Mr. A.A. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Sarita Moharana, Additional Standing Counsel and Mr. Panchanan Panigrahi, lear