The Rajasthan High Court has quashed an FIR registered against a man accused of multiple offences, including rape, cheating and criminal conspiracy, after finding that the complainant and the petitioner were legally married under the Special Marriage Act and had lived together for several years before the complaint was filed. Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand held that continuing the criminal case would amount to an abuse of the process of law.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, approached the High Court seeking quashing of FIR No. 299/2025 registered at Udhyog Nagar Police Station, Sikar. The FIR contained allegations under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including rape, cheating, extortion and criminal conspiracy.
According to the petition, the complainant, an adult woman, had divorced her earlier husband and subsequently married the petitioner under the Special Marriage Act on 21 November 2022. The couple had earlier sought police and court protection, claiming threats from their families because of their interfaith marriage. They later had a daughter born in October 2024.
The complainant later lodged the FIR alleging that she had been deceived into the marriage through drugs, medicines and black magic and also accused the petitioner of sexual offences. The State opposed the petition, arguing that the police investigation had resulted in a charge sheet and charges had already been framed by the trial court.
Court's Observations
After examining the record, Justice Dhand noted that the marriage between the parties had been legally registered and that both had previously approached the High Court seeking protection for their relationship.
The Court observed that the FIR was lodged nearly three years after the marriage and around a year after the birth of the couple's daughter. It also referred to Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, as applicable to the case, and relied on Supreme Court decisions, including Kuldeep Singh v. State of Punjab.
Referring to the facts before it, the bench observed,
"The petitioner is legally wedded husband of the victim. The offence punishable under Section 376 is not made out."
The Court further stated that the allegations in the FIR did not prima facie establish the remaining offences against the petitioner on the material placed before it.
Decision
Allowing the criminal miscellaneous petition, the High Court concluded that continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to misuse of the legal process.
In its concluding order, the bench observed,
"The registration of the impugned FIR is nothing but abuse of the process of law."
The Court consequently quashed the FIR and all proceedings arising from it and disposed of the pending applications.
