Supreme Court Clarifies Distinction Between Rape and Consent

September 10, 2025

Clear Distinction Between Rape and Consensual Sex

The Supreme Court on Wednesday emphasised the need for courts to carefully differentiate between rape and consensual sex, particularly in cases where allegations arise from a promise of marriage. The court held that if an accused never intended to marry and entered into a relationship with mala fide motives, such conduct could amount to cheating or deception.

Case Background

The ruling came in an appeal against a 2019 order of the Allahabad High Court, which had refused to quash criminal proceedings. The case stemmed from a complaint filed in 2014 by a woman who alleged rape, unnatural sex, assault, and caste atrocity against the accused for incidents said to have occurred in 2010.

The complaint, filed four years after the alleged events, also implicated the accused’s parents. A magistrate issued summons under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code, which the high court later upheld.

Supreme Court’s Four-Step Test for High Courts

To provide clarity, a bench of justices JB Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta laid down a four-step test for High Courts when deciding petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita):

Quality of Material: Courts must be satisfied that the material relied on by the accused is of impeccable quality and beyond doubt.
Dislodging Allegations: The material, if accepted, should be capable of dislodging the foundation of allegations and convince a reasonable person that the accusations are false.
Refutation by Complainant: Courts must consider whether the complainant has failed to refute the evidence or if the material is inherently uncontestable.
Abuse of Judicial Process: Courts must assess whether continuing the proceedings would amount to abuse of process and fail to serve justice.

If all four conditions are satisfied, the High Court should quash the proceedings to protect the accused from harassment and conserve judicial time.

Findings in the Present Case

The Supreme Court found the allegations in this case baseless and unconvincing. It noted that:

The complaint was filed four years after the alleged incidents with no explanation for the delay.
The complaint lacked specific particulars such as date and place of incident.
Even the parents of the accused were unnecessarily implicated.
Multiple unrelated charges were added, raising doubt about the genuineness of the case.

The bench observed that the complaint “doesn’t inspire confidence” and appeared to be an abuse of process.

Court’s Observations on False Promises of Marriage

While stressing the need to treat genuine cases of rape on false promise of marriage with seriousness, the court also highlighted the potential misuse of such allegations. It stated:

“In a case where there is a promise of marriage, the court must very carefully examine whether the accused had actually wanted to marry the victim, or had mala fide motives and had made a false promise to this effect only to satisfy his lust.”

Outcome of the Case

Agreeing with the accused’s counsel, the Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, setting aside the high court’s refusal. The ruling reaffirmed the importance of judicial scrutiny to prevent frivolous or vexatious complaints that tarnish reputations and misuse judicial resources.