Rajasthan High Court: In an application filed by applicant-husband seeking the recall of the order quashing the FIR under Section 366 of the Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), a single-judge bench comprising of Birendra Kumar,* J., while dismissing the application held that no statutory offense under Sections 494 and 497 IPC was made out since the wife’s voluntary live-in relationship did not constitute adultery or remarriage during the lifetime of a spouse.
In the instant matter, the respondent filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) seeking the recalling of an order passed by the High Court quashing an FIR under Section 366 IPC. Respondent claimed to be the informant of the FIR but couldn’t contest the case earlier due to incarceration in another matter. The FIR was filed alleging the abduction of his wife by the accused.
The Court considered the respondent’s contention alongside the statement of the wife, who appeared before the court and affirmed that she wasn’t abducted but was in a voluntary live-in relationship with one of the accused. The applicant argued that despite the wife’s admission to an extra-marital relationship, offences under Sections 494 and 497 IPC should apply to protect social morality cited in Manjot Singh v. State of Punjab, Criminal Writ Petition No.158/2023, order dated 25-01-2023, but the Court noted that relevant Supreme Court precedent as weren’t presented in that case. Relying on precedents such as Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1 and Safi Jahan v. Asokan K.M., (2018) 6 SCC 368, the Court emphasised on the primacy of constitutional morality over societal morality, particularly regarding privacy rights.
Referring to S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal, (2010) 5 SCC 600 and Joseph Shine v. Union of India, (2019) 3 SCC 39, the Court reiterated that “no statutory offence takes place when adults willingly engage in sexual relations outside the marital setting”, except for adultery, which had been struck down. Furthermore, the offense under Section 494 IPC applies only if a remarriage during the lifetime of a spouse is proven, not merely a live-in relationship. The wife and other accused jointly affirmed the voluntary nature of the relationship with one of the accused. Consequently, the Court found no merit in the applicant’s plea and dismissed the petition.
[Yadram v. State of Rajasthan, 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 705, order dated 21-03-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Jai Raj Tantia through VC, Counsel for the Petitioners;
Mr. Ghanshyam Singh Rathore GA cum AAG with Mr. Mangal Singh Saini, PP through VC, Counsel for the Respondents;
Mr. Ankit Khandelwal through VC, Counsel for the Complainant.
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
