BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court has quashed an FIR against a 23-year-old man accused of raping a woman he met on a dating app, observing that a relationship entered into by mutual consent cannot be converted into a criminal offence except in the "clearest of cases".
Allowing the petition filed by the man, Justice M Nagaprasanna said, "A relationship born of mutual volition, even if it founders in disappointment, cannot, save in the clearest of cases, be transmuted into an offence under the criminal law."
According to the prosecution, the accused and the complainant got acquainted through a dating app and later maintained regular contact on Instagram for over a year. On August 11, 2024, the two met in person, had a meal together, and subsequently went to a hotel where they allegedly engaged in physical intimacy. The next day, the man dropped the woman back at her residence.
The complaint stated that the following day the woman underwent a medical examination at a hospital, where she was reportedly informed that she had been sexually assaulted.
She then lodged a police complaint, leading to the registration of an FIR under section 64 (rape) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the subsequent arrest of the accused.
Seeking to quash the case, the petitioner contended that the interactions between the two, including photos, chats, and videos clearly showed that their relationship was consensual.
He also alleged that the investigating officer had deliberately omitted these details from the chargesheet.
The State, however, opposed the plea, arguing that the matter of consent could only be determined during the trial.
After examining the complaint, chargesheet, and chat records produced before the court, Justice Nagaprasanna observed that the messages exchanged between the two "are not in good taste" but make it evident that the acts were consensual.
"If the present prosecution were permitted to meander into a trial, it would be nothing but a ritualistic procession towards miscarriage of justice and indeed become an abuse of the process of law," the judge remarked.
Consequently, the High Court quashed the FIR against the petitioner.