Rajasthan High Court Quashes Rape FIR After Prosecutrix Says Case Was Filed Due To Family Pressure
The Rajasthan High Court has quashed criminal proceedings in a rape case after noting that the petitioner and the prosecutrix had married even before the registration of the FIR, were now living together in a happy and stable matrimonial relationship, and that the prosecutrix stated the FIR had been lodged due to pressure from her family. [2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 297]
Justice Baljinder Singh Sandhu observed that the parties had married in 2020 and that their relationship had endured for nearly six years despite the pendency of the criminal proceedings. The Court held that permitting the prosecution to continue would only cause unnecessary hardship to both parties and jeopardise their settled matrimonial life.
"Having voluntarily chosen to live together long ago, and having reunited despite the intervening litigation, this Court is of the considered view that no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue merely because the trial has reached an advanced stage."
The Court was dealing with a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing of criminal proceedings arising from an FIR registered for offences under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), 377, 384, 506 and 450 of the IPC on the ground that the parties had amicably resolved their disputes and were now living together as husband and wife.
Before the Court, the prosecutrix stated that she had married the petitioner before the FIR was registered. However, after the marriage, both returned to their respective homes. When her parents came to know about the marriage, the FIR came to be lodged under their pressure. She further stated that in December 2025 she again left with the petitioner and, since December 25, 2025, they had been residing together as husband and wife with the consent of both families.
Taking note of these facts, the Court observed that the entire sequence of events indicated that the criminal proceedings were initiated as a consequence of family pressure. Although the trial had reached an advanced stage, the relationship between the parties had remained consensual since its inception and had survived for over six years.
"Despite the pendency of the criminal proceedings and the circumstances surrounding the case, the prosecutrix and the petitioner have chosen to continue living together as husband and wife."
The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Prashant Bhartiya v. State of Delhi, wherein it was held that even in serious offences, criminal proceedings may be quashed where the parties have settled the dispute and continuation of the prosecution would serve no useful purpose.
It also referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Madhukar v. State of Maharashtra, which held that although offences under Section 376 IPC are grave and ordinarily should not be quashed on the basis of compromise, the Court's inherent powers to secure the ends of justice must be exercised on the peculiar facts of each case.
Applying those principles, the High Court noted that the prosecutrix had unequivocally expressed her desire to continue her matrimonial life with the petitioner and no longer had any grievance against him.
"The relationship between the parties has survived the passage of almost six years... Rather than being estranged by the litigation, they have reunited and are presently living together as husband and wife... permitting the prosecution to continue despite the unequivocal stand of the prosecutrix would only result in unnecessary hardship to both parties and jeopardize the settled matrimonial life which they have consciously chosen to lead."
Holding that continuation of the criminal proceedings would neither serve the ends of justice nor achieve the object of criminal law and would instead amount to an abuse of process, the Court allowed the petition and quashed the entire criminal proceedings against the petitioner.
Title: P v. State of Rajasthan & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 297