LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

KULDEEP SINGH versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

Citation: [2025] 1 S.C.R. 1392 · Decided: 31-01-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAM NATH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 1 S.C.R. 1392 : 2025 INSC 137
Kuldeep Singh 
v. 
The State of Punjab & Ors.
(Criminal Appeal No. 520 of 2025)
31 January 2025
[Vikram Nath* and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
The accused-appellant’s petition u/s.482 of the Criminal Procedure 
Code, 1973 seeking quashing of the FIR u/ss.366, 376 and 506 
of Penal Code, 1860 was dismissed by the High Court.
Headnotes†
Penal Code, 1860 – ss.366, 376 and 506 – Allegation against 
the accused-appellant that he abducted the respondent 
no. 3/victim – FIR u/s.366 IPC was registered – Whereas, it 
was the case of the appellant that he and respondent no. 3 
had married each other – The respondent no. 3 had recorded 
a statement u/s.164 of the Cr.P.C, with the JMFC raising 
allegations of rape against the appellant and also alleged that 
the marriage was solemnised forcibly by the appellant – After 
investigation, the SIT filed the inquiry report – s.366 of IPC was 
deleted and only ss.376 and 506 of IPC survived against the 
appellant as per the charge-sheet – Appellant sought quashing 
of criminal proceedings – The High Court, vide the impugned 
order, had dismissed the appellant’s petition – Correctness:
Held: The appellant has also brought to notice the written statement 
dated 01.08.2023 filed by the respondent no. 3 in the matter of 
restitution of conjugal rights and highlighted that she has nowhere 
made any allegations pertaining to rape against the appellant in 
the said written statement – There is also an order passed by the 
High Court on 21.06.2022 providing protection to the petitioners 
therein being the appellant and respondent no. 3 – The said 
petition was jointly filed by the appellant and respondent no. 3 
seeking protection from the family members of the respondent 
no. 3 as she had married the appellant of her own free will and 
* Author
[2025] 1 S.C.R. 
1393
Kuldeep Singh v. The State of Punjab & Ors.
volition against the wishes of her family members – Further, the 
respondent no. 3 or for that matter respondent no. 2 despite service 
of notice, have not come forward to dispute or deny the above 
facts – It must be noted that the case as of now, after the filing of 
charge-sheet, survives only to the extent of allegations u/ss.376 
and 506 of IPC as it was established during the inquiry that the 
victim had solemnised the marriage with the appellant out of her 
own free will – It has been rightly pointed out by the appellant 
that as per Exception 2 u/s.375 of IPC, sexual intercourse by a 
man with his own wife cannot be termed as rape and, hence, a 
charge u/s.376 of IPC cannot be sustained against the appellant – 
Further, the conduct of the respondent no. 2 and 3 in failing to enter 
appearance despite sufficient notice is reflective of the fact that 
it is a dead case where no purpose shall be served in continuing 
the criminal proceedings alleging charges of rape against the 
appellant – As such, given the facts and circumstances of the 
case, it is evident that no prima facie case constituting any offence 
is made out against the appellant and he is entitled to the relief 
sought – Thus, the impugned FIR filed against the appellant and all 
consequential proceedings arising therefrom deserve to be quashed. 
[Paras 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17]
List of Acts
Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
List of Keywords
Rape; Abduction; Quashing of criminal proceedings; Marriage; 
Restitution of conjugal rights; Free will; Exception 2 u/s.375 of IPC; 
Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife; Notice; Appearance.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
520 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 22.08.2023 of the High Court 
of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in CRMM No. 41161 of 2023
Appearances for Parties
Miss Aanchal Jain, Karan Dewan, Advs. for the Appellant.
Mohd Irshad, A.A.G., Karan Sharma, Advs. for the Respondents.
1394
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Vikram Nath, J.
1.	
Leave granted.
2.	
The instant appeal has been preferred against the order dated 
22.08.2023 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in 
CRM-M-No. 41161 of 2023 wherein the accused-appellant’s petition 
under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 19731 seeking 
quashing of the FIR No. 148 dated 14.06.2022 under Section 366, 
376 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 18602 was dismissed.
3.	
Brief facts of the matter are that Respondent No. 2 is the comp

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.