Bombay HC Quashes Rape Case: Consensual Relationship Cannot Be Treated as False Promise of Marriage
Court Notes Complainant Was Married, Relationship Was Voluntary
Judges Stress Misuse of Rape Laws in Personal Disputes
By Our Legal Correspondent
New Delhi: March 10, 2026:
Also Read: CBI Arrests Key Accused in ₹20,000 Crore Bitcoin Scam
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court quashed an FIR and charge sheet against Raghav Rajesh Aggarwal, who was accused of rape under Section 376 IPC based on a false promise of marriage. The Court held that the relationship was consensual and that the complainant, being married at the time, could not have legally married the accused. This judgment reinforces the principle that consensual relationships cannot be criminalized under the guise of false promises.
[Recommended Research Resources]
📘 Legal professionals and students alike will benefit from Will Writing Simplified, which covers procedure and case law in detail.
🔹 Buy on Amazon
🔹 Buy on Flipkart
Also Read: Supreme Court Slams NCERT Over Judiciary Chapter Rewrite, Blacklists Experts
Case Background
- The complainant alleged that Aggarwal engaged in sexual relations with her by promising marriage.
- The FIR included charges under Sections 376(2)(n) & 377 IPC, provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and sections of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
- The High Court noted that the complainant was already married during the alleged period of intimacy, making the promise of marriage legally untenable.
- The Court concluded that the relationship was consensual and later deteriorated, which cannot amount to rape.
Key Observations by the Court
- Consensual Relationship: The Court emphasized that the intimacy was voluntary and mutual.
- Legal Ineligibility: Since the complainant was married, the promise of marriage could not be legally fulfilled.
- Quashing of FIR: The Court quashed both the FIR and charge sheet, ruling that the allegations did not constitute rape.
- Misuse of Law: Judges warned against misuse of rape provisions in personal disputes where relationships sour.
Also Read: Supreme Court in Bharti Telecom Case: NCLAT Bench Valid Even with Majority Technical Members
Implications of the Ruling
- For Accused Persons: Provides relief in cases where consensual relationships are later mischaracterized as rape.
- For Complainants: Reinforces the need for strong evidence of deception or coercion.
- For Legal System: Strengthens judicial caution against criminalizing consensual intimacy.
Conclusion
Also Read: Bombay HC Quashes ₹1 Crore GST Seizure: A Landmark Ruling for Traders
The Bombay High Court’s ruling in Raghav Rajesh Aggarwal v. State of Maharashtra is a landmark in clarifying the scope of rape laws. By quashing the case, the Court reaffirmed that consensual relationships, even if they later deteriorate, cannot be treated as rape based on false promises of marriage. Legal experts believe this judgment will serve as a precedent, ensuring that criminal law is not misused in personal disputes.
Keywords for Faster Searches
- Bombay High Court rape case quashed
- False promise of marriage Section 376 IPC
- Consensual relationship legal ruling India
- Raghav Rajesh Aggarwal case Bombay HC
- FIR quashed false promise marriage
- Misuse of rape laws India
Also Read: J&K High Court: Private Agreement Cannot End Marriage, But Can Prove Separation