In Brief
A man was accused of rape under promise of marriage in two separate FIRs registered by a woman. The Supreme Court quashed both FIRs, finding no credible evidence of his guilt. The Court noted grave contradictions between the two complaints—the second alleged multiple sexual encounters ante-dated to before the first complaint, yet the educated 30-year-old complainant had omitted them from her initial FIR. Evidence showed the complainant had filed identical false complaints against other men and her own chats revealed manipulative intent to trap and exploit victims. The Court held the accused justified in backing out upon discovering her aggressive and obsessive behaviour.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.