2025 INSC 782 SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 1 of 13

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2025

[Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024]

AMOL BHAGWAN NEHUL …APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

& ANR. …RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This Appeal by special leave is directed against the

Impugned Order dt. 28.06.2024 passed by the High Court of

Judicature at Bombay in Crl. W.P. No. 3181 of 2023 whereby the

Petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

(‘CrPC’) seeking quashing of the Criminal Case C.R. No.

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 2 of 13

490/2023 dt. 31.07.2023 for offences punishable u/s 376,

376(2)(n), 377, 504 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter

“IPC”) registered at Karad Taluka Police Station, Satara qua the

Appellant was dismissed. Vide an amendment to the Petition, the

Appellant also challenged the chargesheet filed on 26.09.2023

and the proceedings in RCC no. 378/2023 pending before the

Additional Sessions Judge, Karad.

3. The Criminal Case C.R. No. 490/2023 dt. 31.07.2023 at

Police Station Karad Taluka, Dist. Satara was registered at the

behest of a Complaint filed by the Complainant/Respondent

no. 2 alleging that during the period 08.06.2022 till 08.07.2023,

the Appellant forcibly had sexual intercourse with her on the false

assurance of marriage. The Complainant/Respondent no. 2 who

had been previously married, had obtained Khulanama from her

ex-husband and had been residing with her 4-year-old son at her

parental home in Kalegaon, Karkad Dist since 2021; while the

Appellant, a 23-year-old student of Bachelor of Science

(Agriculture) at Krishna College of Agriculture, Rethre BK,

Taluka Karad District, Satara was residing as a tenant next door,

with three other men since 25.05.2022. The sequence of events as

recorded in the FIR 490/2023 dt. 31.07.2023 are as under:

3.1 The parties became acquainted on 08.06.2022,

which turned into a friendship and they soon began

interacting more frequently. The relationship blossomed into

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 3 of 13

love, but it is stated that the Complainant/Respondent no. 2

repeatedly denied to make physical relations with the

Appellant.

3.2 It is alleged the case of the Complainant that in July

2022, the Appellant had entered the house of the

Complainant/Respondent no. 2 at night, and said that once

she obtains divorce from her husband, the Appellant would

instantly marry her and on this pretext had sexual intercourse

with her, despite her denial. It is stated that since then, the

parties continued meeting outside and having meals

together; however later on 21.09.2022 on the occasion of the

Appellant’s birthday, when the Complainant/Respondent

had visited the Rajyog Lounge, Varunji Phata, Airport

Karad, the Appellant again had sexual intercourse with her

on the assurance of marriage. Thereafter, the Appellant

allegedly borrowed money from the

Complainant/Respondent no.2 on various occasions & used

her car, Hyundai Verna No. MH-12-HZ-9559 for his

personal use.

3.3 In January 2023, the parties visited Pushkar Lodge,

Ogalewadi, Karad, where the Appellant told the

Complainant that he had not informed his family about their

relationship, however, he would marry her once her divorce

was finalized. Allegedly, despite her objection, the Appellant

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 4 of 13

on this assurance of marriage, again had sexual intercourse

with the Complainant/Respondent no. 2 and there is a

specific allegation that he committed unnatural sex with her.

It is alleged that soon thereafter, the Appellant had reduced

his interactions with the Complainant/Respondent no. 2, did

not answer her phone calls and left for his hometown at

Ahmednagar.

3.4 On 08.07.2023, the Complainant/Respondent no. 2

visited his native village in Ahmednagar and met his parents

and other relatives, who refused to marry the Appellant with

Complainant/Respondent no. 2 as they belonged to different

religions. Allegedly, when the Complainant refused to leave,

the parents of the Appellant, his brother and his uncle pushed

her aside by beating and abusing her. The Complaint dt.

31.07.2023 was registered after 23 days of the alleged

incident at PS Taluka Karad, Dist. Satara.

4. The Appellant on the other hand, has narrated the sequence

differently, stating that during the alleged period of incidence,

when he had been assigned a program at Village Kalegaon, Tq.

Karad. Dist. Satara for five months, he became acquainted with

the Complainant/Respondent no. 2 as his neighbor. The Appellant

has denied the allegations of having forced sexual intercourse

with the Complainant/Respondent no. 2 on the assurance of

marriage, and stated that it was in-fact the

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 5 of 13

Complainant/Respondent no. 2 who had approached him with

proposals and would regularly visit his college, which even led to

grievances raised with the college faculty. Vide a written

Complaint dt. 24.07.2023 with the Police Inspector, Karad Taluka

PS Satara, the father of the Appellant has alleged that the

Complainant/Respondent no. 2 had been harassing his son & had

taken him to different lodges against his will and had threatened

to implicate him in false rape cases, if he refused to marry her. A

Non-Cognizable Offence Information Report (NCR)

1

dt.

24.07.2023 had been registered pursuant to a threatening phone

call received on 22.07.2023 at 10:30 pm in the night, on the

Appellant’s mobile number from another mobile, allegedly

threatening that she will beat him by entering his house and

destroy his family.

5. Pursuant thereto that the FIR had been maliciously

registered against him and that no prima-facie case u/s 376,

376(2)(n), 377, 504 & 506 IPC could be made out against him,

the Appellant sought anticipatory bail from the Additional

Sessions Judge, Karad, which was granted vide Order dt.

23.08.2023. The Additional Sessions Judge, while granting bail

to the Appellant made the following remarks:

“9. In this backdrop the point cannot be side lined

that the victim is matured to understand the

1

Section 155 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 6 of 13

significance and morality to which she is

consenting. The prosecutrix who is major lady gives

consent even on any of the aforesaid assumption

and she had sexual intercourse with

applicant/accused, she will be under all

circumstances and in all respect considered to be a

consenting party. This coupled with the fact that day

after day, week after week and month after month,

this arrangement continued until the day of

reckoning when she complained that promise of

marriage is not fulfill or that all this while she was

being fedup of this false assurance. Whatever be the

worth of promise or assurance, in law informant is

deemed to have given consent on her own accord as

far as sexual intercourse is concerned. When two

young male and female having attained the age of

discretion get attracted to each other and due to

emotional and passionate attachment succumbed to

temptation of sexual relationship then such mental

and voluntary participation does not come in the

way of granting bail. Hence, accused is entitled for

pre-arrest bail. The apprehension shown by

prosecution will be safeguarded by imposing

conditions…….”

6. The Appellant then preferred Crl. W.P. No. 3181 of 2023

seeking quashing of the C.R. No. 490/2023 dt. 31.07.2023 & the

proceedings emanating therefrom before the High Court of

Judicature at Bombay, and in the meanwhile, the investigation

culminated into a charge-sheet 26.09.2023 before the Additional

Sessions Judge, Karad.

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 7 of 13

7. The learned counsel for the Appellant contends that the

High Court has erred in dismissing the Petition u/s 482 CrPC

insofar as the criminal proceedings in the present case constitute

an abuse of process of law, and is well within the categories as

contemplated by this Court in State of Haryana Vs Bhajan Lal

2

.

It is argued that the allegations of forcible sexual assault and

unnatural sex are highly improbable as there is no medical

evidence to adduce that forcible sexual assault and unnatural sex

had been committed upon the Complainant/Respondent no. 2 and

that allegations of rape are unsustainable as the relationship

between the parties being two mature adults was purely

consensual in nature. It is argued that the captioned FIR is

registered after a delay of 13 months from the date of the alleged

incident, which is considerable to cast doubt on the veracity of the

allegations made by the Complainant/Respondent no. 2,

especially when she sustained her relationship with the Appellant

since the alleged incident.

8. Having heard both sides in this case and after carefully

considering the material on record, the following attributes come

to the fore:

(a) Even if the allegations in the FIR are taken as a true

and correct depiction of circumstances, it does not appear

2

1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 8 of 13

from the record that the consent of the

Complainant/Respondent no. 2 was obtained against her will

and merely on an assurance to marry. The Appellant and the

Complainant/Respondent no. 2 were acquainted since

08.06.2022, and she herself admits that they interacted

frequently and fell in love. The Complainant/Respondent

no. 2 engaged in a physical relationship alleging that the

Appellant had done so without her consent, however she not

only sustained her relationship for over 12 months, but

continued to visit him in lodges on two separate occasions.

The narrative of the Complainant/Respondent no. 2 does not

corroborate with her conduct.

(b) The consent of the Complainant/Respondent no. 2 as

defined under section 90 IPC also cannot be said to have been

obtained under a misconception of fact. There is no material

to substantiate “inducement or misrepresentation” on the part

of the Appellant to secure consent for sexual relations without

having any intention of fulfilling said promise. Investigation

has also revealed that the Khulanama, was executed on

29.12.2022 which the Complainant/Respondent no. 2 had

obtained from her ex-husband. During this time, the parties

were already in a relationship and the alleged incident had

already taken place. It is inconceivable that the Complainant

had engaged in a physical relationship with the Appellant, on

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 9 of 13

the assurance of marriage, while she was already married to

someone else. Even otherwise, such promise to begin with

was illegal and unenforceable qua the Appellant.

(c) There is no evidence of coercion or threat of injury

to the Complainant/Respondent no. 2, to attract an offence

under section 506 IPC. It is improbable that there was any

threat caused to the Complainant/Respondent no. 2 by the

Appellant when all along the relationship was cordial, and it

was only when the Appellant graduated and left for his

hometown to Ahmednagar, the Complainant/Respondent

no. 2 became agitated. We also cannot ignore the conduct of

the Complainant/Respondent no. 2 in visiting the native

village of the Appellant without any intimation, which is also

unacceptable and reflects the agitated and unnerved state of

mind of the Complainant/Respondent no. 2. For the same

reason, the criminal prosecution against the Appellant herein

is probably with an underlying motive and disgruntled state

of mind.

(d) There is also no reasonable possibility that the

Complainant/Respondent no. 2 or any woman being married

before and having a child of four years, would continue to be

deceived by the Appellant or maintain a prolonged

association or physical relationship with an individual who

has sexually assaulted and exploited her.

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 10 of 13

9. In our considered view, this is also not a case where there

was a false promise to marry to begin with. A consensual

relationship turning sour or partners becoming distant cannot be

a ground for invoking criminal machinery of the State. Such

conduct not only burdens the Courts, but blots the identity of an

individual accused of such a heinous offence. This Court has time

and again warned against the misuse of the provisions, and has

termed it a folly

3

to treat each breach of promise to marry as a

false promise and prosecute a person for an offence under section

376 IPC.

10. As demonstrated hereinabove, the ingredients of the

offence under Sections 376 (2)(n) or 506 IPC are not established.

The present case squarely falls under categories enumerated in

Para 102(5) & 102(7) as identified by this Court in State of

Haryana Vs Bhajan Lal (supra) for the exercise of powers u/s

482 CrPC by the High Court so as to prevent the abuse of process

of law. Para 102 reads as under:

“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the

various relevant provisions of the Code under

Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated

by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the

exercise of the extraordinary power under Article

226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the

Code which we have extracted and reproduced

above, we have given the following categories of

3

Naim Ahmed Vs State (NCT) of Delhi (2023) SCC Online SC 89.

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 11 of 13

cases by way of illustration wherein such power

could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the

process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends

of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down

any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently

channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid

formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad

kinds of cases wherein such power should be

exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first

information report or the complaint, even if they are

taken at their face value and accepted in their

entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or

make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information

report and other materials, if any, accompanying

the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence,

justifying an investigation by police officers under

Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of

a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2)

of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in

the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in

support of the same do not disclose the commission

of any offence and make out a case against the

accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not

constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a

non-cognizable offence, no investigation is

permitted by a police officer without an order of a

Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of

the Code.

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or

complaint are so absurd and inherently

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 12 of 13

improbable on the basis of which no prudent

person can ever reach a just conclusion that there

is sufficient ground for proceeding against the

accused.

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in

any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned

Act (under which a criminal proceeding is

instituted) to the institution and continuance of the

proceedings and/or where there is a specific

provision in the Code or the concerned Act,

providing efficacious redress for the grievance of

the aggrieved party.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly

attended with mala fide and/or where the

proceeding is maliciously instituted with an

ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the

accused and with a view to spite him due to private

and personal grudge.”

11. Taking into consideration that the Appellant is just 25 years

of age, and has a lifetime ahead of him, it would be in the interest

of justice that he does not suffer an impending trial and, therefore,

the proceedings emanating from C.R. No. 490/2023 dt.

31.07.2023 are quashed at this stage itself.

12. Consequently, the Appeal is allowed and the Impugned

Order dt. 28.06.2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature at

Bombay in Crl. W.P. No. 3181 of 2023 is set aside. Accordingly,

C.R. No. 490/2023 dt. 31.07.2023 registered at Karad Taluka

Police Station, Satara and proceedings emanating therefrom in

RCC no. 378/2023 pending before the Additional Sessions Judge,

SLP (Crl.) No. 10044 of 2024 Page 13 of 13

Karad are quashed, and Appellant is discharged. Bail bonds, if

any, also stand cancelled.

13. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

……………………………………J.

[B.V. NAGARATHNA]

……………………………………J.

[SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA]

NEW DELHI

May 26, 2025