The Delhi High Court has issued notice in a writ petition filed by a young advocate and his father seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against them under multiple provisions of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, on allegations of rape, criminal intimidation, and related offences. The matter was placed before the bench of Justice Ravinder Dudeja, who, after hearing preliminary submissions, issued notice to the respondents.
The FIR was lodged by a woman complainant, naming Rahul Yadav and his father as accused. The FIR invokes Sections 64(2), 79, 123, and 351(2) of the BNS, alleging sexual assault, threats, and other serious charges. The petitioners approached the High Court invoking its writ jurisdiction, alleging that the complaint is devoid of merit and amounts to a misuse of criminal law.
Represented by Advocate Kunal Yadav and Advocate Kartikey Yadav, the petitioners contended that the allegations stem from a failed consensual relationship between Rahul Yadav and the complainant. According to the petition, the two were romantically involved since September 2023 while residing in the same residential building in Jagatpuri. The relationship was consensual, and the first instance of physical intimacy allegedly occurred on September 22, 2023, with the full consent of the complainant.
The petition further claims that Rahul Yadav proposed marriage in February 2024, which was declined by the complainant’s family on account of caste-related objections. It is alleged that, subsequent to the rejection, threats were issued to falsely implicate Rahul in a criminal case.
Screenshots of WhatsApp, Telegram, and text message exchanges have been placed on record to demonstrate the consensual nature of the relationship and to highlight inconsistencies in the complainant’s conduct, including alleged financial demands and a parallel relationship with another individual. The petition also points out a chronological gap in the complaint narrative, questioning how the first incident is stated to have occurred in August 2024 when Rahul began residing at the property in June 2023, and further refers to the delayed filing of the FIR, registered over a month after the last alleged incident in April 2025.
The second petitioner, Rahul Yadav’s father, a serving Sub-Inspector in Uttar Pradesh Police, has also been named in the FIR. The plea asserts that he was discharging official duties in Ballia between April 9 and April 12, 2025, and submits General Diary entries in support of his alibi. The petition contends that his implication amounts to a coercive measure and constitutes a misuse of the criminal justice process
It is also stated that interim protection was granted to Rahul Yadav by an Additional Sessions Judge at Karkardooma Court on May 20, 2025, on the ground that no prima facie case was made out to justify immediate arrest.
The High Court directed the issuance of notice and listed the matter for further hearing on October 9, 2025. The Court’s order at this stage is procedural, with substantive adjudication on the merits of the petition pending.
Source Link
Picture Source :
