Justice J. B. Pardiwala, Justice K. Vinod Chandran, Supreme Court
Chats Speak Volumes Regarding Complainant’s Behaviour: Supreme Court Quashes Proceedings Against Mother In Son’s False Promise To Marry Case
|The mother had approached the Supreme Court aggrieved by the criminal proceedings initiated by the complainant against her.
While noting that the copies of the chats between the complainant and the accused woman’s son produced by the accused herself spoke volumes regarding the complainant’s behaviour, the Supreme Court has quashed the proceedings against a mother who was booked in her son’s false promise to marry case.
The appellant mother sought quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated by the second respondent-complainant against her.
The Division Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran stated, “We have also gone through Annexure P1, translated copies of the chats between the second respondent and the appellant’s son; produced by the appellant herself, which itself speaks volumes regarding the behavior of the second respondent. We would not say anything more and suffice it to observe that the entire allegations, according to us, inspires no confidence. While allegation of promise to marry is raised, it is pertinent to notice that the statement of the father of the second respondent itself, as available in the chargesheet indicates that the second respondent was married and estranged from her husband. There is nothing stated as to a divorce having been obtained, in which case the allegation of second respondent having been led by a promise of marriage cannot at all be believed.”
Factual Background
The appellant by an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) sought quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated by the second respondent against her. The second respondent alleged that the appellant’s son promised to marry her and the appellant too connived actively, with her son, with the promise of marriage. It was alleged that based on such promise, the appellant’s son obtained sexual favours from the second respondent and also appropriated large amounts by the sale of a car owned by the second respondent.
Reasoning
On a perusal of the First Information Statement (FIS), the Bench held that the same indicated that the second respondent had a consensual relationship with the appellant’s son.
“The FIS at one-point states that while they were travelling together, once the appellant’s son had alighted from the car near a Court, to attend a proceeding, upon which the second respondent is said to have rejected the proposal for marriage. Again, the proposal was agreed to, only on the appellant’s son promising to turn a new leaf and reform himself, which obviously he did not”, it noted.
The Bench was of the view that the appellant, who is the mother of the person against whom the second respondent makes allegations, cannot definitely be roped in.
Finding no reason to continue the proceedings in question, the Bench ordered, “The criminal proceedings shall stand quashed as against the appellant. If the accused is in prison, she shall be released forthwith and if she is on bail, her bail bonds shall stand cancelled.”
Cause Title: Ilaben v. The State of Gujarat and Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 879)