Supreme Court delivers judgment on consensual relationship and quashing of rape charges.
CASE SUMMARY – In Amol Bhagwan Nehul vs. State of Maharashtra, Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings initiated against a 23-year-old student accused of rape based on a false promise of marriage. The Court noted the consensual nature of the relationship, inconsistencies in the complainant’s narrative, lack of coercion, and significant delay in filing the FIR. Relying on precedents, particularly State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal, the Court ruled that the case represented a misuse of the criminal process. It concluded that a consensual relationship turning sour cannot justify invoking serious criminal charges and discharged the appellant.
| ASPECTS | DETAILS |
| Case Title | Amol Bhagwan Nehul vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. |
| Introduction | Appeal against Bombay High Court’s dismissal of quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC related to charges under IPC Sections 376, 377, 504, 506. |
| Factual Background | Allegations of rape based on false promise of marriage by a 23-year-old student, countered by claims of consensual relationship and harassment by complainant. |
| Legal Issues | Whether FIR and proceedings for rape and other charges constitute abuse of process under Section 482 CrPC. |
| Applicable Law |
|
| Analysis | Court found relationship consensual, complainant’s conduct inconsistent, lack of coercion or threat, FIR delayed and prima facie improbable. |
| Conclusion | Proceedings quashed, appeal allowed. Court held it was not a case of false promise to marry but a consensual relationship turned sour. |
| Current Scenario | Appellant discharged, FIR and proceedings quashed, bail bonds cancelled. |
“A consensual relationship turning sour cannot be a ground for invoking criminal machinery of the State.”
SOURCE – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ALSO READ – SECTION 376 OF IPC
