[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Vaibhav S/O Dipak Sadanshiv vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps ... on 13 January, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:506-DB
1 27.APL.1183-2025.JUDGMENT.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1183 OF 2025
Vaibhav S/o Dipak Sadanshiv,
Age 32 Years, Occ. Business,
R/o Anand Nagar, Ward No. 4,
Post Mudza, Ta & Dist. Gadchiroli.
APPLICANT
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Police Station Officer,
Police Station Gadchiroli,
Ta & Dist. Gadchiroli.
2. X.Y.Z. (Victim) in Crime
No.266/2025, Thr. Police Station
Officer, Police Station Gadchiroli,
Dist. Gadchiroli. NON-APPLICANTS
-----------------------------------------------
Mr. S. Deshpande, Advocate a/w Mr. S.D. Borkute, Advocate for
the Applicant.
Mr. N.H. Joshi, APP for the Non-applicant No.1/State.
Mr. V.V. Sharma, Advocate (Appointed) for the Non-applicant
No.2.
-----------------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.
DATED : 13th JANUARY, 2026.
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
2 27.APL.1183-2025.JUDGMENT.odt
1. Heard.
2. ADMIT. Heard finally by the consent of learned
Counsel for the respective parties.
3. The Applicant has approached this Court by filing
the present Application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya
Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023 for quashing of the First
Information Report in connection with Crime No.266/2025
dated 02.05.2025 registered with Police Station Gadchiroli,
District Gadchiroli under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and consequent proceeding arising out of
the same bearing Sessions Case No.77/2025 pending before the
Additional Sessions Judge-1, Gadchiroli.
4. The crime is registered on the basis of the report
lodged by the Non-applicant No.2 on an allegation that she was
serving at Gadchiroli in the year 2018 and she got acquaintance
with the present Applicant in the year 2019 who proposed her
for marriage. It is further alleged that, on the promise of
marriage he used to visit her room and subjected her for the
forceful sexual assault and subsequently he declined to perform
3 27.APL.1183-2025.JUDGMENT.odt
marriage with her. It is the allegation that, on the promise of
marriage he established physical relations with her. On the basis
of the said report Police have registered the crime against the
present Applicant. During investigation, the Investigating
Officer has recorded the relevant statements of the witnesses,
collected the medical certificate and after completion of the
investigation submitted charge-sheet against the present
Applicant.
5. Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant who
submitted that, the entire relationship between the Applicant
and Non-applicant No.2 was consensual and there was no iota
of concealment or misrepresentation. He submitted that, the
Non-applicant No.2 obtained a report itself and submitted that,
there was a promise of marriage and on that count there was
physical relationship between them. Thus, the relationship
which is of a consensual in nature out of mutual affection
developed between them, no offence is made out as far as the
offence under Section 69 of the BNS is concerned. He submitted
that, by no stage of imagination it can be said that the Applicant
has lured the Non-applicant No.2 and out of lust the said
4 27.APL.1183-2025.JUDGMENT.odt
offence is committed. On the contrary, the statement of Victim/
Non-applicant No.2 itself shows that, out of the promise of
marriage she has developed the relationship with the Applicant,
and therefore, no prima facie case is made out. In view of that,
the Application deserves to be allowed.
6. Per contra, learned APP strongly opposed the
contentions of the learned Counsel for the Applicant and
pointed out the various statements of the witnesses and
submitted that, on the promise of marriage i.e. under the
misconception of the fact the Applicant has subjected for
forceful sexual assault, and therefore, prima facie case is made
out, and therefore, the Application deserves to be rejected.
7. Learned appointed Counsel for the Non-applicant
No.2, has endorsed the same contentions and submitted that the
Non-applicant No.2 was exploited by the Applicant not only
physically but he has also extracted money from her and he
invited my attention towards the statement recorded under
Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as some
screen shots showing that the amounts are extracted from the
5 27.APL.1183-2025.JUDGMENT.odt
Non-applicant No.2. He submitted that, considering all these
facts the Application deserves to be rejected.
8. On hearing both the sides and on perusal of the
entire investigation papers it reveals that, the Applicant and the
Non-applicant No.2 got acquaintance with each other in the
year 2018 and thereafter till 2024 the said relationship was
continued. Thus, it is relevant that it was a consensual
relationship between the Applicant and Non-applicant No.2 by
understanding the consequences of the act. This aspect is
considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in various decisions.
9. In view of these facts, I am of the considered
opinion that the relationship was nothing but consensual in
nature between two major persons. The concept of 'consent' has
been elaborated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. ,
(2019) 9 SCC 608, which reads as under :
"16. Where the promise to marry is false and the intention
of the maker at the time of making the promise itself was
not to abide by it but to deceive the woman to convince
her to engage in sexual relations, there is a "misconception
of fact" that vitiates the woman's "consent". On the other
hand, a breach of a promise cannot be said to be a false
6 27.APL.1183-2025.JUDGMENT.odt
promise. To establish a false promise, the maker of the
promise should have had no intention of upholding his
word at the time of giving it. The "consent" of a woman
under Section 375 is vitiated on the ground of a
"misconception of fact" where such misconception was the
basis for her choosing to engage in the said act."
10. In Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana, (2013) 7
SCC 675, this Court observed:
"21. ... There is a distinction between the mere breach of a
promise, and not fulfilling a false promise. Thus, the court
must examine whether there was made, at an early stage a
false promise of marriage by the accused; and whether the
consent involved was given after wholly understanding the
nature and consequences of sexual indulgence. There may
be a case where the prosecutrix agrees to have sexual
intercourse on account of her love and passion for the
accused, and not solely on account of misrepresentation
made to her by the accused, or where an accused on
account of circumstances which he could not have
foreseen, or which were beyond his control, was unable to
marry her, despite having every intention to do so. Such
cases must be treated differently.
24. Hence, it is evident that there must be adequate
evidence to show that at the relevant time, i.e. at the initial
stage itself, the accused had no intention whatsoever of
keeping his promise to marry the victim. There may, of
course, be circumstances, when a person having the best of
intentions is unable to marry the victim owing to various
unavoidable circumstances. The "failure to keep a promise
made with respect to a future uncertain date, due to
reasons that are not very clear from the evidence available,
does not always amount to misconception of fact. In order
to come within the meaning of the term "misconception of
fact", the fact must have an immediate relevance". Section
90 of IPC cannot be called into aid in such a situation, to
pardon the act of a girl in entirety, and fasten criminal
liability on the other, "unless the court is assured of the fact
that from the very beginning, the accused had never really
intended to marry her.
(Emphasis supplied)"
7 27.APL.1183-2025.JUDGMENT.odt
11. In Uday Vs. State of Karnataka, (2003) 4 SCC 46,
the complainant was a college going student when the accused
promised to marry her. In the complainant's statement, she
admitted that she was aware that there would be significant
opposition from both the complainant's and accused families to
the proposed marriage. She engaged in sexual intercourse with
the accused but nonetheless kept the relationship secret from
her family. The court observed that in these circumstances the
accused promise to marry the complainant was not of
immediate relevance to the complainant's decision to engage in
sexual intercourse with the accused, which was motivated by
other factors: (SCC P.58, Para 25)
"25. There is yet another difficulty which faces the
prosecution in this case. In a case of this nature two
conditions must be fulfilled for the application of Section
90 IPC. Firstly, it must be shown that the consent was
given under a misconception of fact. Secondly, it must be
proved that the person who obtained the consent knew, or
had reason to believe that the consent was given in
consequence of such misconception. We have serious
doubts that the promise to marry induced the prosecutrix
to consent to having sexual intercourse with the appellant.
She knew, as we have observed earlier, that her marriage
with the appellant was difficult on account of caste
considerations. The proposal was bound to meet with stiff
opposition from members of both families. There was
therefore a distinct possibility, of which she was clearly
conscious, that the marriage may not take place at all
despite the promise of the appellant. The question still
remains whether even if it were so, the appellant knew, or
8 27.APL.1183-2025.JUDGMENT.odt
had reason to believe, that the prosecutrix had consented
to having sexual intercourse with him only as a
consequence of her belief, based on his promise, that they
will get married in due course. There is hardly any
evidence to prove this fact. On the contrary, the
circumstances of the case tend to support the conclusion
that the appellant had reason to believe that the consent
given by the prosecutrix was the result of their deep love
for each other. It is not disputed that they were deeply in
love. They met often, and it does appear that the
prosecutrix permitted him liberties which, if at all, are
permitted only to a person with whom one is in deep love.
It is also not without significance that the prosecutrix
stealthily went out with the appellant to a lonely place at
12 clock in the night. It usually happens in such cases,
when two young persons are madly in love, that they
promise to each other several times that come what may,
they will get married...
(Emphasis supplied)"
12. To summarize the legal position that emerges from
the above cases, the "consent" of a woman with respect to
Section 375 must involve an active and reasoned deliberation
towards the proposed act. To establish whether the "consent"
was vitiated by a "misconception of fact" arising out of a
promise to marry, two propositions must be established. The
promise of marriage must have been a false promise given in
bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time
it was given. The false promise itself must be of immediate
relevance or bear a direct nexus to the woman's decision to
engage in the sexual act.
9 27.APL.1183-2025.JUDGMENT.odt
13. I am therefore of the view that, the matter squarely
falls within the parameters laid down in the judgment in the
case of State of Harayana & Ors. Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others ,
1992 AIR 604, which read as under:
"1) ........
2) ........
3) ........
4) ........
5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are
so absurd and inherently 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) ........
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."
14. The allegations made in the First Information
Report, upon careful perusal, appear to be inherently
improbable and devoid of material substance. It is difficult to
accept that a woman of mature understanding, would continue
to voluntarily meet and maintain physical intimacy with him
over an extended period if such acts were indeed induced by
deception or coercion.
10 27.APL.1183-2025.JUDGMENT.odt
15. In my considered opinion, this is a fit case to quash
the charge-sheet/final report form. Accordingly, I proceed to
pass the following order.
ORDER
i. Criminal Application is allowed.
ii. The First Information Report in connection with
Crime No. 266/2025 dated 02.05.2025 registered
with Police Station Gadchiroli, District Gadchiroli
under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
(BNS), 2023 and consequent proceeding arising out
of the same bearing Sessions Case No.77/2025
pending before the Additional Sessions Judge-1,
Gadchiroli, are hereby quashed and set aside to the
extent of present Applicant.
iii. Fees of the learned Appointed Counsel be quantified
as per rules.
16. Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of
accordingly.
(URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.)
S.D.Bhimte
Signed by: Mr.S.D.Bhimte
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 14/01/2026 13:55:25
