In DR. AVADESH KUMAR v. STATE NCT Of DELHI and ANOTHER, A Single-judge bench quashes FIR under IPC 376 & SC/ST Act, holding criminal law cannot be used to penalise the end of a consensual adult relationship.
New Delhi, January 22, 2026: The Delhi High Court has ruled that a failed romantic relationship between consenting adults cannot be retrospectively construed as a criminal offence such as rape. The bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma delivered the judgment on 22 January 2026, quashing a First Information Report (FIR) filed under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (“SC/ST Act”).
Background of the Case
The FIR had been registered at the Wazirabad Police Station, Delhi, in September 2023 by a woman alleging that the accused had engaged her in a physical relationship under the pretext of a promise to marry and had sexually exploited her. She also claimed that caste-based insults were made during the alleged encounter.
The accused challenged the FIR before the High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (“CrPC”), seeking its quashing on the ground that the relationship was consensual and the criminal proceedings were an abuse of process of law.
Legal Issue
The principal legal question before the court was whether consensual intercourse in a romantic relationship that later broke down could be retroactively branded as rape, and whether a complaint arising solely from personal grievances after a relationship ended can sustain criminal prosecution under rape and SC/ST atrocity provisions.
Final Ruling
The Delhi High Court granted the petition, quashing the FIR and all proceedings emanating from it. The court held that the allegations emerged from the breakdown of a consensual relationship, and continuing with criminal proceedings in such circumstances would amount to an abuse of the legal process.
Reasoning of the Court
Justice Sharma emphasised that:
- The material on record, including WhatsApp communications between the parties, indicated a long-standing consensual romantic relationship rather than one founded on coercion or deceit. There was no contemporaneous evidence of protest, distress, or any promise of marriage by the man at the relevant time.
- An “educated and independent adult” entering a consensual relationship must recognise that such relationships contain inherent uncertainties and do not necessarily lead to marriage.
- Emotional distress or disappointment following a breakup should not be automatically converted into allegations of criminality. Courts must exercise caution and discernment when evaluating claims arising after relationships end, particularly where evidence suggests voluntary intimacy.
- The court noted that in the present matter, the breakdown of the relationship, rather than any tangible evidence of coercion or exploitation, motivated the filing of the criminal complaint. Accordingly, invoking serious penal provisions for a personal grievance constitutes an abuse of the criminal justice system.
In addition, the SC/ST Act charge was dismissed due to lack of evidence showing caste-based intent or abuse in the interactions.
Practical Implications
- Clarification on Consent and Criminal Law: The judgment reinforces that consensual sexual relations between adults, even if they do not culminate in long-term commitments or marriage, do not automatically attract criminal prosecution after a breakup.
- Judicial Caution Against Misuse: Courts should be wary of misuse of serious penal provisions like Section 376 and the SC/ST Act to settle personal scores or grievances that arise from failed relationships.
- Evidence-Based Scrutiny: The decision emphasises the need to look at contemporaneous and credible evidence such as communication records, timing of FIR registration, and absence of immediate complaints to discern whether allegations pertain to genuine offences or are rooted in personal disputes.
- Impact on Future Cases: This ruling aligns with a broader judicial approach cautioning against converting “every sour relationship into a rape case”, underscoring that not all disappointments in personal relationships should be adjudicated through the criminal justice system.
The judgment adds clarity on the principle that consensual relationships between adults, even if they end in emotional distress, cannot be artificially recast as criminal offences in the absence of cogent evidence of coercion, deception, or other constituent elements of the penal provisions invoked.
Suggested tags: Delhi High Court, Rape Law, Consent, Criminal Law Misuse, SC/ST Act, Section 482 CrPC, Relationship Breakup
