The Supreme Court on Wednesday delivered a significant ruling on the intersection of consensual relationships and criminal law, quashing an FIR against a Non-Resident Indian (NRI) living in Zimbabwe who had been accused of luring a woman into a sexual relationship under the false promise of marriage.
The case came to light when the complainant alleged that the accused, an NRI based in Zimbabwe, had promised to marry her by December 2024. However, in January 2025, the man reportedly informed her that his mother did not consent to the alliance, after which he declined to proceed with the wedding. The woman, aggrieved by what she described as a broken promise, filed a complaint alleging that the accused had deceived her into a sexual relationship under false pretences.
According to the complaint, the two met once and spent two days together at a hotel. The woman subsequently alleged that the relationship was founded on dishonest promises and that she was exploited emotionally and physically.
However, a bench of the Supreme Court, while hearing the matter, observed that the facts disclosed in the complaint itself pointed toward a consensual relationship between two adults. The court noted that there was no evidence of coercion, force, or fraudulent inducement in the nature of the relationship.
In its order dated September 7, the Supreme Court emphasised that a parent's refusal to approve a relationship cannot, in law, be treated as a false promise or criminal deception. The court reasoned that if two individuals voluntarily enter into a relationship and engage in consensual intimacy, the subsequent breakdown of that relationship — especially on grounds such as familial opposition — does not automatically transform a civil matter into a criminal offence.
The court exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the FIR, observing that continuing the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. It held that the allegations, even if taken at face value, did not disclose any cognizable offence of sexual exploitation or cheating under the Indian Penal Code.
Legal experts said the judgment reinforces the principle that courts must carefully distinguish between broken romantic promises and criminal conduct. "A difference in family consent or personal choice cannot be weaponised to convert a personal dispute into a criminal case," said one senior advocate familiar with the matter. The ruling is expected to guide lower courts and police in handling similar complaints involving NRI-related relationship disputes.
