SC Protects Man’s Right to Say No: Rape FIR Quashed After Woman’s Aggressive Sexual Conduct

In an important ruling that underscores the importance of recognising male agency and consent in sexual relationships, the Supreme Court has quashed two criminal cases filed against a man by a woman who accused him of rape on the pretext of marriage. The top court found that the allegations were “fabricated and malicious,” and driven by “vindictive and manipulative tendencies.”

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta allowed the appeal filed by Batlanki Keshav (Kesava) Kumar Anurag, then residing in the United States, and set aside the Telangana High Court’s refusal to quash the FIRs. The apex court observed that continuing the criminal proceedings against the appellant would amount to a “travesty of justice” and “gross abuse of the process of court.”

The case involved two FIRs filed in 2021 and 2022 by the same woman, a 30-year-old postgraduate student. The Supreme Court highlighted that a similar complaint had previously been filed by her in 2019 against an Assistant Professor at Osmania University, where she was enrolled, accusing him of sexual exploitation under a false promise of marriage.

The 2021 FIR alleged a single incident of sexual intercourse on June 24, 2021. However, in the 2022 FIR, the woman claimed multiple instances of sexual relations, all of which pre-dated the 2021 complaint — raising serious doubts about her credibility.

Calling the omissions “inherently improbable,” the bench remarked,

“It is thus inherently improbable that the complainant would have forgotten or omitted to mention these incidents of sexual intercourse made under a false promise of marriage.”

What ultimately swayed the court were chat transcripts submitted by the accused, in which the complainant allegedly admitted to being “manipulative,” aiming to “get a green card holder,” and referring to the accused as her “next victim.” She also wrote that she would “irritate her victims until they dumped her,” enabling her to “happily start with the next one.”

The court remarked:

“These chats depict the stark reality about the behavioural pattern of the de-facto complainant who appears to be having manipulative and vindictive tendency.”

The bench noted that the appellant had made logistical arrangements for marriage, including hotel bookings, but decided to back out after witnessing what he described as “aggressive sexual behaviour and obsessive tendencies” on the part of the complainant.

The court held:

“The accused appellant was absolutely justified in panicking and backing out from the proposed marriage.”

Importantly, the court clarified that even if the man had withdrawn from the marriage promise, that alone could not constitute rape under Section 376(2)(n) IPC, nor did the facts support a charge under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Case Title: Batlanki Keshav (Kesava) Kumar Anurag vs State of Telangana & Anr

Click here to download judgment