Sachin Gupta v. the State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.
[2026] 10 S.C.R. 289 : 2026 INSC 1082
Sachin Gupta
v.
The State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.
(Criminal Appeal No. 4721 of 2026)
01 October 2026
[J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose as regards correctness of the order passed by the
High Court refusing to quash the rape case wherein the parties
were in a consensual relationship.
Headnotes†
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Quashing of
criminal proceedings arising out of FIR alleging rape, sexual
assault – FIR by second respondent alleging sexual assault
by appellant, and refusal to marry her, and also allegations
of assault and threat against other person – Second
respondent’s case that their relationship continued for long,
she was impregnated twice, and aborted later – She alleged
that she was assaulted in the hotel room and threatened of
making the intimate video viral – However, appellant’s case
that second respondent, being a bank employee pestered
the appellant who was a bank customer to invest in bank
schemes, and on his refusal she extorted money from him,
which he paid initially and later refused to pay – Thereupon,
he filed two complaints and the said FIR was counter blast
to the police inquiries – Appellant sought quashing of FIR
which was refused by the High Court – Correctness:
Held: There had been a consensual relationship between the
parties which went sour and then each started accusing the
other – Complaint was filed specifically to coerce the appellant
into marrying the complainant, failing which she wanted punitive
action taken for the sexual assault and the exploitation – 2nd
respondent though she asserts that twice her pregnancy was
aborted, there is nothing indicated in the medical report to that
end – No purpose would be served in carrying out a trial – On
290 [2026] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
a conspectus of the entire facts and circumstances, the High
Court ought to have invoked its powers u/s.482 to quash the
complaint – High Court having not done so, the impugned order
set aside and charge sheet in criminal case quashed – No
criminal proceedings shall be continued in the above case, either
against the appellant or any other accused in the FIR; since
the foundation of the allegations is on the criminal culpability of
the accused having raped the complainant on the promise of
marriage – Allegations of hurt, having been caused, and criminal
intimidation as alleged against the other accused also fail to
impress. [Paras 8-13]
Case Law Cited
Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.,
2025 SCC OnLine SC 1947 – referred to.
List of Acts
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
List of Keywords
Sexual assault; Parties in a consensual relationship; Quashing
of criminal proceedings arising out of FIR alleging rape, sexual
assault; Refusal to marry; Assault and threat; Impregnated; Making
the intimate video viral.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No.
4721 of 2026
From the Judgment and Order dated 11.02.2026 of the High Court
of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in CRMP No. 439 of 2026
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant(s):
K. Parameshwar, Sr. Adv., Nishanth Patil, Mehul Kumar Garg,
Ayush P Shah, Nikhil Purohit, Mrs. Anuradha Agarwal, Adit Garg,
Nishanth Patil.
Advs. for the Respondent(s):
Praneet Pranav, D.A.G., Abhishek Pandey, Siddhartha Sinha.
[2026] 10 S.C.R. 291
Sachin Gupta v. The State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Order
Leave granted.
2. The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned order, refusing to quash
FIR No.326 of 2025 registered at Police Station Manipur, Surguja
on 05.12.2025 on the First Information Statement of the second
respondent at Police Station Manipur, Surguja. The allegation was
of sexual assault by the 1st accused, who is the appellant herein
and further allegation of refusal to marry levelled against him. The
other persons arrayed are accused of assaulting and threatening her
from lodging a complaint with respect to an incident that occurred
on 29.10.2025.
3. We heard Mr. K. Parameshwar, learned Senior Counsel appearing
for the appellant and Mr. Siddhartha Sinha, learned AoR appearing
for the respondent State. Though notice was issued to the 2 nd
respondent, none appeared.
4. In considering the application for quashing a criminal complaint in
general, this Court had laid down certain propositions in Pradeep
Kumar Kesarwani v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. 1. The facts of
the said case indicate a similar circumstance where rape was alleged
against one person, which was identical to this case. It was stated
that no complaint was made on a rape carried out, since there was,
later, a promise to marry by the perpetrator. Paragraph 20 of the
said decision is extracted herein: -
20. The following steps should ordinarily determine the
veracity of a prayer for quashing, raised by an accused
by invoking the power vested in the High Court under
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.:-
(i)Step one, whether the material relied upon by the
accused is sound, reasonable, and indubitable, i.e., the
materials is of sterling and impeccable quality?
(ii) Step two, whether the material relied upon by the
accused, would rule out the assertions contained in the
1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1947
292 [2026] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
charges levelled against the accused, i.e., the material
is sufficient to reject and overrule the factual assertions
contained in the complaint, i.e., the material is such, as
would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and
condemn the factual basis of the accusations as false.
(iii) Step three, whether the material relied upon by
the accused, has not been refuted by the prosecution/
complainant; and/or the material is such, that it cannot
be justifiably refuted by the prosecution/complainant?
(iv) Step four, whether proceeding with the trial would
result in an abuse of process of the court, and would
not serve the ends of justice?
If the answer to all the steps is in the affirmative, judicial
conscience of the High Court should persuade it to quash
such criminal – proceedings, in exercise of power vested
in it under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Such exercise of
power, besides doing justice to the accused, would save
precious court time, which would otherwise be wasted
in holding such a trial (as well as, proceedings arising
therefrom) specially when, it is clear that the same would
not conclude in the conviction of the accused. [(See:
Rajiv Thapar & Ors. v. Madan Lal Kapoor (Criminal
Appeal No. 174 of 2013)]
5. In the present case, the appellant admits that he got acquainted
with the 2 nd respondent, who was an employee of a bank; where
he used to be a frequent customer. It is also his case that taking
advantage of the relationship between a bank official and a customer,
the 2 nd respondent obtained his mobile number and was in the
habit of pestering him to invest in the various schemes floated by
the bank. He had been consistently refusing it, upon which the 2 nd
respondent raised allegations against him and extorted money, which
he initially paid and later refused to succumb to. He is also stated
to have registered two complaints Annexure P1 dated 07.11.2025,
and Annexure P2 dated 02.12.2025. The present FIR registered on
05.12.2025 is a counter blast to the inquiries initiated by the police
on his complaints.
6. Going through the averments, it is very clear that there was a
consensual relationship between the parties. Both the parties have
[2026] 10 S.C.R. 293
Sachin Gupta v. The State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.
admitted that they became acquainted from the bank, where the 2nd
respondent was an employee. The allegation of the 2nd respondent
is that on 05.05.2024, the appellant took her in a car, got her
intoxicated and committed rape on her. On regaining consciousness,
the appellant implored with her not to report the incident and agreed
to marry her. Admittedly, the relationship continued for long and the
2nd respondent claims to have been impregnated twice in October
2024 and February 2025, which were also aborted.
7. Then it is alleged that on 29.10.2025, she was attacked by the
appellant and his cousin in a hotel room and they forced her out of
the room and in front of the hotel staff, she was assaulted and there
were threats levelled of videos of their intimate relationship being
made viral. The further allegation is that on the next day when she
was proceeding to register a complaint, the appellant along with
the other accused threatened her with her life and she was forced
to go back to her house without registering a complaint. She says
that subsequently, the appellant’s father has been threatening her
continuously in which circumstances, especially since she wants
to marry the appellant, she is filing this complaint since if he does
not marry her, she wants punitive action to be taken against the
appellant for the sexual exploitation and assault.
8. Looking at the extract from the above decision, insofar as step one is
concerned, the material relied upon by the appellant clearly indicates
money having been paid by the appellant to the 2 nd respondent;
which the former claims, was in pursuance of the extortion made
by the 2 nd respondent. Two complaints were also lodged by the
appellant before the jurisdictional police station. On step two, we
have to specifically notice that admittedly there was a courtship
and even according to the 2 nd respondent she was raped against
her will and then the desire to marry was put forth. No allegation
of a promise to marry, proffered to entice the 2 nd respondent into a
sexual relationship, was raised. The specific allegation is that the
petitioner was raped and, to desist her from reporting the same, the
desire to marry was expressed, which was voluntarily and willingly
accepted. The allegation of rape, hence, is delayed by more than
one and a half years.
9. The assault in a hotel room was never reported to the police, either by
the hotel staff or by the 2nd respondent. The allegation that she was
threatened by the relatives of the appellant also was not reported.
294 [2026] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
The complaint was filed specifically to coerce the appellant into
marrying the complainant, failing which she wanted punitive action
taken for the sexual assault and the exploitation. We also notice
that the 2nd respondent though she asserts that twice her pregnancy
was aborted, there is nothing indicated in the medical report to that
end.
10. On Step four, we are of the definite opinion that no purpose would
be served in carrying out a trial.
11. On a conspectus of the entire facts and circumstances, we are of
the opinion that the High Court ought to have invoked its powers
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to
quash the complaint. The High Court having not done so, we set
aside the impugned order and quash charge sheet No.5 of 2026,
dated 19.01.2026 in Criminal Case No.147 of 2026 pending in the
Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambikapur, District Sarguja as
revealed from Exhibits P9 and P10. No criminal proceedings shall
be continued in the above case, either against the appellant or
any other accused in the above FIR; since the foundation of the
allegations is on the criminal culpability of the accused having raped
the complainant on the promise of marriage. The allegations of hurt,
having been caused, and criminal intimidation as alleged against
the other accused also fail to impress us.
12. We are also of the opinion that since the FIR against the appellant
has been quashed, further proceedings in respect of Annexure P1
and Annexure P2 also need not be proceeded with.
13. We pass these consequential directions only since we are convinced
that there had been a consensual relationship between the parties
which went sour and then each started accusing the other.
14. The appeal stands allowed.
15. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand rejected.
Result of the case: Appeal allowed.
†Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain