The Madhya Pradesh High Court has quashed a rape case registered against an Army personnel, observing that a long-term consensual relationship between two adults cannot later be treated as a criminal offence merely because the relationship ended.
The Court held that the facts revealed a voluntary relationship between the parties lasting over a decade and did not disclose the ingredients required to constitute rape on the pretext of marriage.
Read also:- Allahabad High Court Slams UP Officials Over Namaz Restriction in Sambhal During Ramzan
Background of the Case
The case arose from an FIR lodged in March 2025 at Mahila Thana in Bhopal. The complainant alleged that the petitioner had developed physical relations with her on a false promise of marriage.
According to the complaint, the two first met in December 2012 at an Army Canteen in Bhopal. They began communicating regularly and later entered into a physical relationship. The complainant claimed that the petitioner initially told her he was unmarried and promised to marry her.
However, the FIR also stated that in 2013 the complainant came to know that the petitioner was already married. Despite this knowledge, the relationship between them continued for several years. The dispute surfaced only in 2025, when the complainant alleged that the petitioner was in contact with other women and had threatened her.
Based on these allegations, police registered offences under Sections 69 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking quashing of the FIR under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
The petitioner argued that the relationship between the parties was entirely consensual.
Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner told the Court that the complainant was a mature and educated woman working as a police constable in the Special Police Establishment, Lokayukta Organization. He submitted that she was aware of the petitioner’s marital status as early as 2013 but still continued the relationship voluntarily until 2025.
It was further argued that the allegations did not disclose any deception or fraudulent promise of marriage. Instead, the case reflected a relationship between two consenting adults which later turned sour.
The petitioner also relied on several Supreme Court judgments to contend that consensual relationships cannot later be criminalised merely because marriage did not take place.
Opposing the petition, the State argued that the petitioner had misrepresented his marital status in the beginning and induced the complainant to enter into a physical relationship on the promise of marriage.
Read also:- Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Appointment of School Worker, Says RTE Act Doesn’t Bar Class
Counsel for the complainant also submitted that the petitioner had repeatedly assured both the complainant and her parents that he would marry her. According to the complainant, the relationship was built on deception, and therefore the offence of rape on the false pretext of marriage was made out.
They urged the Court not to interfere with the prosecution since a charge sheet had already been filed and the trial had commenced.
After examining the FIR, the complainant’s statement, and the arguments of both sides, the Court noted that the relationship between the parties continued for nearly 12 to 13 years.
Justice Vinay Saraf observed that both individuals were educated and serving in disciplined services - the petitioner in the Indian Army and the complainant in the police department.
“The consent of a woman must involve an active and reasoned deliberation toward the act,” the Court observed, explaining that for rape to be established on the basis of a false promise of marriage, it must be shown that the promise was dishonest from the very beginning.
The Court also noted that the complainant had continued the relationship even after learning that the petitioner was already married.
In such circumstances, the judge remarked, it was difficult to believe that the physical relationship was solely the result of a false promise of marriage.
The Court further observed that the FIR appeared to have been filed after the relationship deteriorated.
Concluding that the case reflected a consensual relationship rather than a criminal offence, the High Court held that the continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law.
The Court therefore allowed the petition and quashed the FIR registered as Crime No. 95/2025 at Mahila Thana, Bhopal, along with the charge sheet and all subsequent proceedings arising from it.
Case Title: Varun Pratap Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
Case No.: Misc. Criminal Case No. 35779 of 2025
Decision Date: 11 March 2026
