LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/jothiragawan-vs-state-rep-by-the-inspector-of-police-anr-20250324/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Jothiragawan vs State Rep. By The Inspector of Police & Anr.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
24 March 2025
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 1434 of 2025
Result
Allowed
Bench
Sudhanshu Dhulia, K. Vinod Chandran
Citation
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 951 : 2025 INSC 386
Acts & Sections
CrPC IPC
Supreme Court Reports [2025] 3 S.C.R. 951 : 2025 INSC 386
Issue for consideration
Whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant-accused ought to be quashed.
Headnote

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Penal Code, 1860 – s.376 – Complainant-victim alleged that she was coerced into sexual intercourse by the appellant-accused thrice under false promise of marriage – High Court rejected the application filed by the appellant u/s.482 holding that he had obtained forced consent from the victim by promising to marry her – Interference with: Held: Parties were closely related and were admittedly in a relationship – The couple had sexual intercourse thrice – Victim willingly accompanied the accused to hotel rooms – There was no promise of marriage to coerce consent from the victim for sexual intercourse – The promise if any was after the first physical intercourse and even later the allegation was forceful intercourse without any consent – In all the three instances it was alleged that the intercourse was on threat and coercion and there is no consent spoken of by the victim, in which case there cannot be any inducement found, on a promise held out – Furthermore, allegation of forceful intercourse on threat and coercion is also not believable, given the relationship admitted between the parties and the willing and repeated excursions to hotel rooms – Sexual relationship admitted by both the parties was not without the consent of the victim – Criminal proceedings against the appellant are an abuse of process of the court, quashed. [Paras 8, 11, 13, 14]

Keywords: Promise of marriage · Quashing · Abuse of process of the court · Parties closely related · Admitted relationship · Hotel rooms · Physical relationship · Forced consent · Misrepresentation · Misconception · Rape · Cheating · Fraudulent inducement · Coercion · Sexual intercourse · Refused to marry · Sexual relationship admitted · Threat · Forceful intercourse · Inherent and extraordinary power

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment K. Vinod Chandran, J. Leave Granted. 2. An application made under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure1 was rejected by the High Court of Judicature at Madras; which is impugned herein. For brevity ‘Cr.P.C.’ 3. We heard Mr. M. P. Parthiban, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sabarish Subramanian, learned Counsel for the State and Mr. Vairawan A.S. learned Counsel for the complainant. 4. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that there were multiple interactions by the complainant and the accused, who were both major individuals, which clearly indicates co
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →