RAVISH SINGH RANA versus STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

Citation: [2025] 4 S.C.R. 2722 · Decided: 28-04-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJAY KAROL, MANOJ MISRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 4 S.C.R. 2722 : 2025 INSC 635
Ravish Singh Rana 
v. 
State of Uttarakhand & Anr.
(Criminal Appeal No. 2438 of 2025) 
28 April 2025
[Sanjay Karol and Manoj Misra, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the petition filed by the 
appellant for quashing of FIR and the consequential proceedings.
Headnotes†
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – s.528 – Quashing – 
Parties were in a live-in relationship for over two years, living 
in a rented accommodation – Second respondent filed FIR 
against the appellant u/ss.376, 323, 504, 506, IPC alleging that 
he established physical relationship with her many times with a 
promise to marry however, later refused to marry – High Court 
dismissed the petition filed by the appellant for quashing of 
FIR – Interference with:
Held: If two able-minded adults reside together as a live-in couple 
for more than a couple of years and cohabit with each other, 
a presumption arises that they voluntarily chose that kind of a 
relationship fully aware of its consequences – The relationship 
between the parties was for over two years – They not only admit 
of having physical relations with each other but also of living 
together in a rented accommodation as a live-in couple – FIR does 
not allege that physical relationship was established only because 
there was a promise of marriage – Besides, physical relationship 
continued for over two years without any complaint – The long-
drawn relationship of the parties including the circumstance of 
their living together and cohabiting with each other, that too, in 
a separate rented accommodation, gives rise to a presumption 
that their relationship was based on a valid consent – Therefore, 
the allegation that such relationship was entered because there 
was a promise of marriage is rejected – Moreover, the settlement 
agreement executed between the parties stating that they love each 
other shows that they were in love – Thus, the appellant cannot 
be subjected to prosecution for the offence of rape on the ground 
[2025] 4 S.C.R. 
2723
Ravish Singh Rana v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr.
of refusal to marry – Impugned judgment set aside – FIR and the 
consequential proceedings quashed. [Paras 11, 14, 16, 17, 18]
Live-in relationships – Long-drawn relationships, proliferation 
of – Duty of Courts – Stated. [Para 15]
Case Law Cited
Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharastra and Another 
[2019] 11 SCR 423 : (2019) 9 SCC 608; Deepak Gulati v. State of 
Haryana [2013] 6 SCR 544 : (2013) 7 SCC 675; Sonu @ Subash 
Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another [2021] 2 SCR 137 : 
(2021) 18 SCC 517 – relied on.
List of Acts
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; Penal Code, 1860; 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
List of Keywords
Quashing; Live-in-relationships; Live-in couple; Long-drawn 
relationship; Living together; Rented accommodation; Implied 
consent; Valid consent; Cohabit; Voluntary physical relationship; 
Physical relationship established with a promise to marry; False 
promise of marriage; Mere breach of a promise not a false promise; 
Refusal to marry; Rape; Forcibly established physical relationship; 
Settlement agreement; FIR quashed.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
2438 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 11.12.2024 of the High Court 
of Uttarakhand at Nainital in CRMA No. 922 of 2024
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant:
Gautam Barnwal, Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Nishant Gill, Saksham 
Kumar, Aakash, Mukesh Kumar.
Advs. for the Respondents:
Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, Ajay Bahuguna, Siddhant Yadav, Garvesh 
Kabra, Ms. Pallavi Kumari.
2724
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Order
1.	
Leave granted.
2.	
This appeal impugns judgment and order of the High Court of 
Uttarakhand1, dated 11.12.2024, by which Criminal Misc. Application 
No. 922 of 2024 filed by the appellant for quashing FIR No. 482 of 
2023 and proceedings arising therefrom, including the cognizance 
order dated 13.02.2024, has been dismissed.
3.	
Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the instant appeal are as follows:
(i)	
The second respondent lodged a First Information Report2 
at Police Station3 Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar on 
23.11.2023 against the appellant, inter-alia, alleging that on 
06.02.2021, the informant got introduced to the appellant through 
Facebook; after introduction, they began a live-in relationship; 
during this period th
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.