Karnataka High Court quashes case filed by Bengaluru woman over failed marriage talks

Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has quashed proceedings related to rape, abetment and cheating on the promise of marriage against a man, his mother and their neighbour. 

The complainant woman was in a relationship with the man for six years and filed the complaint after marriage talks fell through. 

The man, a resident of Bengaluru, and the complainant were childhood friends. Their relationship started when he was 18 years old. However, the woman married someone else and the husband died. 

After this tragedy, their relationship rekindled and went on for another five years. At this stage, talks of marriage took place between their families but failed due to some reasons. She filed a complaint at the jurisdictional Basaveshwara Nagar police station. 

Police investigated the case and filed a charge sheet under IPC sections 376, 420, 323, 504 and 109. 

The man, his mother and their neighbour moved the high court challenging the proceedings. They contended that a childhood friendship had blossomed into a relationship and on such score breach of promise of marriage cannot result in an offence under IPC section 376. The complainant remained unrepresented in the petition. 

Citing Supreme Court judgements on the issue, Justice M Nagaprasanna said that mere break-up between the couple, who were in a relationship for a long time, cannot result in the offence of rape under IPC section 376.

The court noted that if the charge sheet material was considered, on the bedrock of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court, permitting further proceedings would become an abuse of the process of the law. 

"Petitioner No 1, who had a relationship, is drawn into the web of crime. Petitioner No 2, the mother of petitioner No 1, who did not encourage the marriage, is drawn into the web of crime and the neighbour, who had sat with petitioner No 1 and petitioner No 2 for talks of marriage, is also drawn into the web of crime. If further proceedings on the aforesaid facts is permitted, it would undoubtedly result in patent injustice. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the same against these petitioners," the court said.