Ernakulam, March 13, 2025 – The Kerala High Court, in a pivotal ruling, has quashed all criminal proceedings against a man accused of rape on the pretext of marriage, emphasizing the necessity of evaluating sexual assault allegations on a case-to-case basis rather than assuming absolute truth in every complaint.
Court’s Observation
Justice A. Badharudeen, while delivering the judgment in Ajith v. State of Kerala & Anr., noted that for years, Indian society has held the view that no woman would falsely accuse a person of sexual misconduct, given the grave societal consequences she might face. However, in a striking observation, the court remarked:
“In cases where sexual assault has been alleged, the said concept has been carried for the past so many years, on the premise that, in Indian society, any girl would not make any allegation of sexual assault or any other mode of misconduct against a person, as the same would prejudice the right of the girl or woman, as the case may be. However, in recent years, this concept seems to be diluted and in less percentage of the complaints in this line, wherein allegation of rape, sexual molestation and other misconduct projected are without any iota of truth, so as to settle a score and also to compel the persons against whom allegations are made to heed the illegal demands of the complainants. Therefore, this concept could not be followed blindly without analyzing the truth of the allegations in case to case basis.”
This pronouncement underscores a shift in judicial thinking, highlighting that while genuine cases of sexual assault require serious consideration, there is also a growing recognition that false allegations can be misused as a tool for coercion and personal vendetta.
Background of the Case
The case originated from Crime No. 69/2019 of Koppam Police Station, Palakkad, leading to S.C. No. 921/2019 before the Assistant Sessions Court, Ottappalam. The accused, Ajith, son of Unnikrishnan, aged 27, a resident of Thrithala, Palakkad, had filed a petition (Crl.M.C No. 1124 of 2020) under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of proceedings.
The prosecution alleged that Ajith had engaged in a relationship with the complainant between May 30, 2014, and April 20, 2019, under a false promise of marriage. The complainant filed an FIR in April 2019, accusing him of rape. However, the delay of nearly five years in lodging the complaint, as well as evidence suggesting consensual intimacy, raised questions regarding the merits of the allegations.
Legal Issues and Arguments
Advocate U.K. Devidas, representing the petitioner, argued that the allegations were concocted and that the complainant had earlier made similar allegations in 2016 but did not pursue them after the petitioner reassured her about marriage. The counsel contended that the complainant’s decision to wait for three years without any contact with the accused before filing an FIR indicated a lack of bona fide intent.
Public Prosecutor Jibu T.S. and Advocate K.V. Bhadra Kumari, appearing for the complainant, maintained that the complaint was genuine and that the delay in lodging the FIR did not negate the gravity of the offense.
Court’s Analysis and Verdict
Justice A. Badharudeen observed that while sexual assault complaints must be treated with sensitivity, courts must also guard against blind acceptance of allegations without verifying their factual basis. The court remarked that recent trends indicate an increasing number of cases where such allegations are not entirely truthful and are sometimes used as leverage for personal gains.
“When there is a complaint as to commission of rape on the promise of marriage, again withdrawing from prosecution awaiting marriage, that too for a period of three years without any contact in between the parties, is not digestible to prudence.”
The court further noted that the complainant herself had filed an affidavit stating that she had no grievance in the matter of quashing the proceedings. Given these factors, the court held that there was no prima facie material to prosecute the accused under Section 376 IPC and allowed the petition to quash the case.
