Judgment Intelligence
FIR QuashedSachin Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.
2026 INSC 1082
Criminal Appeal No. 4721 of 2026 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4615 of 2026)
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Date of Decision
- 1 October 2026
- Bench
- Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran
- Relevant Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482
Final Outcome
Appeal allowed. The High Court's order was set aside and Charge Sheet No. 5 of 2026 in Criminal Case No. 147 of 2026 before the CJM, Ambikapur was quashed; no proceedings may continue against the appellant or any other accused in the FIR (paras 11, 14).
Key holdings
- A quashing plea is tested by the four Kesarwani steps: sterling material, material ruling out the accusations, material left unrefuted, and whether a trial would abuse the process (para 4).
- No promise of marriage was alleged to have induced the relationship; marriage was offered after the alleged rape and voluntarily accepted, and the rape complaint came over one and a half years later (para 8).
- A complaint filed specifically to coerce the accused into marriage, with unreported assaults and unsupported abortion claims, did not warrant a trial (paras 9-10).
- The chargesheet was quashed for all accused, and the appellant's own complaints against her were also not to be proceeded with (paras 11-12).
Brief Facts
The complainant alleged that on 5 May 2024 the appellant got her intoxicated in a car and raped her, then asked her not to report it and agreed to marry her. The relationship continued, and she said she became pregnant twice and both pregnancies were aborted (para 6). She also alleged an assault in a hotel room on 29 October 2025 and threats by the appellant, his cousin and his father (para 7). The appellant said she had pestered him to invest and extorted money, and that he had lodged two police complaints before her FIR of 5 December 2025 (para 5). The High Court refused to quash the FIR (para 2).
Court's Findings
Applying the Kesarwani steps, the Court found on step one that the appellant's material showed money paid to the complainant, which he said was extorted, and his two earlier police complaints (para 8). On step two, there was admittedly a courtship; she did not allege a promise of marriage proffered to entice her into a sexual relationship, but said marriage was offered after the alleged rape to stop her reporting it, and she accepted it "voluntarily and willingly" (para 8). The rape allegation was thus delayed by more than one and a half years (para 8). Neither the hotel assault nor the threats were reported, and the medical report showed nothing of the claimed abortions (para 9). The complaint was filed "specifically to coerce the appellant into marrying the complainant" (para 9). On step four, no purpose would be served by a trial (para 10). Because the case rested on rape on a promise of marriage, the hurt and intimidation allegations against the other accused also failed; it was a consensual relationship that went sour, after which each accused the other (paras 11, 13).
Legal Principle
Where an alleged rape is followed by a voluntarily accepted offer of marriage and a long consensual relationship, and the complaint is lodged only to coerce marriage, the Kesarwani test favours quashing: a trial would serve no purpose, and the High Court should exercise its Section 482 power (paras 4, 8-11).
Precedents Relied Upon
- Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1947
A prayer for quashing is tested in four steps: whether the material relied on by the accused is sound and of sterling quality; whether it would rule out the accusations; whether it is unrefuted or cannot justifiably be refuted; and whether a trial would abuse the process of the court. If all four are answered in the affirmative, the High Court should quash.
- Rajiv Thapar & Ors. v. Madan Lal Kapoor Criminal Appeal No. 174 of 2013
Source of the four-step quashing test, as cited in the extract from Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani.
