The Orissa High Court has quashed a rape case filed against a man by his former partner, ruling that criminal proceedings cannot be used to settle grievances arising from a failed consensual relationship, particularly when such action threatens to disrupt an established marital life.
Court's Ruling on Consensual Relationships
Justice S.K. Panigrahi, while hearing a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by the accused, held that criminal proceedings should not be permitted to operate in a manner that unnecessarily disrupts a settled marriage, especially when the allegations prima facie stem from the breakdown of a consensual relationship.
Accordingly, the judge set aside the FIR registered at Cuttack Mahila Police Station in August 2024, along with all consequential criminal proceedings under Sections 376(2)(n), 294, 506, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Background of the Case
The complainant alleged that the man was in a relationship with her and had assured her of marriage after consulting his parents. She claimed he later blocked her calls and social media accounts. Upon learning that another woman had been chosen for his marriage, she lodged a complaint, leading to the FIR in August 2024.
The accused, on the other hand, informed the court that he had married another woman on November 17, 2023, and the marriage was registered on August 13, 2024. He was arrested in Bihar in November 2024 and later secured bail from a Cuttack court before approaching the High Court for quashing of the proceedings.
Key Observations by the Court
Examining the records, Justice Panigrahi noted that the parties had been in a romantic relationship since 2018 and had shared physical intimacy over a prolonged period. The judge observed that the relationship appeared to have continued voluntarily for several years without any contemporaneous allegation of coercion, force, or exploitation.
“The materials on record overwhelmingly indicate that the relationship between the parties was consensual in nature,” Justice Panigrahi observed, adding that the complaint was lodged only after the relationship turned sour and the parties drifted apart.
Impact on Marital Life
A significant factor considered by the court was the man’s subsequent marriage. Justice Panigrahi observed that continuation of the criminal proceedings stemming from a past consensual relationship was likely to cause serious prejudice to his existing matrimonial life and family circumstances.
Concluding that the allegations, even if accepted at face value, did not constitute the offences alleged, the High Court quashed the FIR and all related proceedings on May 22, in the interest of justice.
About the Author: Lalmohan Patnaik is a seasoned journalist based in Cuttack, with over three decades of experience, primarily as a correspondent for many prominent English dailies. He covers mainly legal issues.
