The Supreme Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a woman who was accused of actively supporting her son in allegedly obtaining sexual favours from a woman on a promise of marriage. The Court found that the allegations against the mother did not establish any criminal liability.
A Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran passed the order on August 17, 2026, in Criminal Appeal No. 3893 of 2026, arising from Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 18609 of 2025.
Background of the Case
The proceedings arose from an FIR registered at Modasa Town Police Station, District Aravalli, Gujarat, on April 19, 2024.
The allegation was that the appellant’s son had promised to marry the second respondent and, with the alleged involvement of his mother, obtained sexual favours from her. It was also alleged that money was appropriated through the sale of a car belonging to the second respondent.
The woman approached the Supreme Court after seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Supreme Court’s Observation
The Bench examined the First Information Statement and found that it described a consensual relationship between the second respondent and the appellant’s son, while also containing allegations concerning a promise of marriage and a physical relationship.
The Court noted that the allegations were made “blandly without any substantiation” and that the chargesheet extended to more than 200 pages.
The judges also considered translated copies of chats between the second respondent and the appellant’s son. After examining the material placed before it, the Court observed that the allegations “inspires no confidence.”
The Bench further referred to the statement of the second respondent’s father, which indicated that she was married and estranged from her husband. The Court noted that there was no statement showing that a divorce had been obtained.
Importantly, the Court held that the appellant, being the mother of the person against whom the allegations were made, “cannot definitely be roped in” on the material before it.
Decision
The Supreme Court found no reason to continue the criminal proceedings against the appellant in Special (Atro) Case No. 14 of 2024 pending before the Special Court, Modasa.
It consequently quashed the proceedings against her arising from the chargesheet and FIR. The Court directed that if she was in prison, she should be released immediately, while her bail bonds would stand cancelled if she was already on bail.
The appeal was accordingly allowed, and any pending applications were disposed of.
Case Details:
Case Title: Ilaben v. The State of Gujarat and Anr.
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 3893 of 2026 (@ SLP (Crl.) No. 18609 of 2025)
Judge: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran
Decision Date: August 17, 2026
