In a significant ruling, the Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed an FIR accusing a man of rape and criminal intimidation, citing the consensual nature of a long-term relationship and the delayed filing of the complaint.
The case, Rajinder Kumar vs State of J&K and Anr., was heard by Justice Rajnesh Oswal. The petitioner sought quashing of FIR No. 38/2018, registered at Police Station Panchari under Sections 376 and 506 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC). The complainant, a woman, alleged that the petitioner raped her in 2011 and continued sexual relations for nearly seven years under a false promise of marriage.
“It is evident that the prosecutrix remained in a relationship with the petitioner for six-seven long years and lodged the FIR only after he did not agree to send a marriage proposal,” the court stated.
The High Court emphasized that both parties were adults in 2011. The woman was over 20 years old and had never filed any complaint during the entire period of the relationship. She only approached authorities after the petitioner’s marriage was fixed with another woman.
The petitioner, a constable in Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB), proved through service records that he was undergoing training during the alleged time of the first incident and had not taken any leave. He further argued that the complaint was lodged out of personal vendetta after his engagement in 2018.
“A consensual relationship between two adults, followed by a fallout over marriage, cannot be treated as rape unless there is clear evidence of deception or coercion at the beginning,” the judgment noted.
The complainant admitted in her statement under Section 164-A Cr.P.C. that she willingly continued the relationship, hoping the petitioner would marry her. The Court held that no element of threat or force was evident and that the allegations lacked legal substance.
Justice Oswal referred to various Supreme Court rulings, including Sonu @ Subhash Kumar v. State of U.P. and Prashant v. State of NCT of Delhi, emphasizing that consensual relationships cannot be reclassified as rape merely due to a failed marriage promise.
“There is a growing tendency to misuse criminal law when relationships turn sour. Every breach of promise cannot be equated with deception,” the Supreme Court had earlier observed.
Finding no grounds for prosecution, the High Court quashed the FIR, concluding that the accusations were driven by personal grievance rather than any criminal act.
Appearance:
Mr. Mazher Ali Khan, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. Sumeet Bhatia, GA for the State
Case Title: Rajinder Kumar vs State of J&K and Anr., 2025