ORDER : (T.M. NADAF, J.) This petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.372/2023 registered by Sub- Urban Police Station, Kalaburagi City, for the offences punishable under Sections 376 (2)(n), 109 , 420 read with Section 149 of IPC . The police having completed the investigation, filed charge-sheet, which is now committed to the Sessions Court and pending in S.C.No.17/2025 on the file of the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi for the offences punishable under Sections 376 (2)(n) and 109 read with Section 149 of IPC . Though the offence under Section 420 of IPC was registered while filing of the FIR, the same has been dropped while filing charge-sheet. 2. The factual matrix leading to the prosecution case are as under: The complainant/victim was working as a Staff Nurse at Bengaluru. She developed physical intimacy with the accused No.1 who is her relative. She filed a complaint against the accused on 25.12.2023 which reads as under: 3. As per the averments alleged in the complaint, the accused No.1 on a promise of marriage had sexual intercourse with the complainant and subsequently he denied to marry her. As could be seen from the last paragraph of the complaint, it is alleged that the petitioners are opposing to the marriage of the complainant with the accused No.1. The entire allegations are against accused No.1. These petitioners were not at all in the picture when the alleged acts committed by the accused No.1 and even according to the complaint averments, the allegation made against the petitioners is that, they are opposing to the marriage of the accused No.1 with the complainant. 4. Heard Sri.Shivasharana Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. G.B.Yadav, learned HCGP for the respondent-State. The respondent No.2-complainant though served is un-represented. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.Shivasharana Reddy, vehemently submits that, on perusal of the entire complaint and the charge-sheet material it clearly goes to show that, the petitioners are not at all involved in any of the offences alleged against them. There cannot be any abetment as alleged by the police under Section 109 of IPC . The offence alleged under Section 376 of IPC is even according to the complaint and the charge-sheet material is against accused No.1 since he had sexual intercourse with the complainant on a false pretext of marriage. There cannot be any abetment as alleged by the police under Section 109 of IPC . The offence alleged under Section 376 of IPC is even according to the complaint and the charge-sheet material is against accused No.1 since he had sexual intercourse with the complainant on a false pretext of marriage. In these circumstances, registration of a case and continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners herein is an abuse of process of law and amounts to miscarriage of justice. To buttress his arguments, he relies on a Judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mahesh Damu Khare Vs. The State of Maharastra and another, in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.4326/2018 disposed of on 26.11.2024, wherein, the Hon’ble Apex Court has considered the case of the petitioner and quashed the proceedings even in respect of the person against whom charge-sheet has been filed under Section 376 of IPC . Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition. 6. Learned HCGP refuting the submissions of the petitioners vehemently submits that, the charges are serious in nature and the petitioners are close relatives of the accused No.1 and are creating obstacle in the marriage of the complainant with the accused No.1, all are equally responsible for the commission of the offences. Accordingly, he seeks to dismiss the petition. 7. The Hon’ble Apex Court at paragraph Nos.28 to36 has held as under: 28. Moreover, even if it is assumed that a false promise of marriage was made to the complainant initially by the appellant, even though no such cogent evidence has been brought on record before us to that effect, the fact that the relationship continued for nine long years, would render the plea of the complainant that her consent for all these years was under misconception of fact that the Appellant would marry her implausible. Consequently, the criminal liability attached to such false promise would be diluted after such a long passage of time and in light of the fact that no protest was registered by the complainant during all Page 19 of 21 those years. Such a prolonged continuation of physical relationship without demurral or remonstration by the female partner, in effect takes out the sting of criminal culpability and neutralises it. 29. Such a prolonged continuation of physical relationship without demurral or remonstration by the female partner, in effect takes out the sting of criminal culpability and neutralises it. 29. It will be very difficult to assume that the complainant who is otherwise a mature person with two grown up children, was unable to discover the deceitful behaviour of the appellant who continued to have sexual relationship with her for such a long period on the promise of marriage. Any such mendacious act of the appellant would have been exposed sooner without having to wait for nine years. The inference one can draw under the circumstances is that there was no such false promise made to the complainant by the appellant of marriage by continuing to have physical relationship so as to bring this act within the province of Section 376 IPC and therefore, there was no vitiation of consent under misconception of fact. 30. Further, it appears that discontinuance of financial support to the complainant, rather than the alleged resiling from the promise to marry by the appellant appears to be the triggering point for making the allegation by the complainant after a long consensual relationship for about nine years. 31. In our view if criminality is to be attached to such prolonged physical relationship at a very belated stage, it can lead to serious consequences. It will open the scope for imputing criminality to such long term relationships after turning sour, as such an allegation can be made even at a belated stage to drag a person in the juggernaut of stringent criminal process. There is always a danger of attributing criminal intent to an otherwise disturbed civil relationship of which the Court must also be mindful. 32. It is evident from the large number of cases decided by this Court dealing with similar matters as discussed above that there is a worrying trend that consensual relationships going on for prolonged period, upon turning sour, have been sought to be criminalised by invoking criminal jurisprudence. 33. We, however, make it clear that our decision in this case and observations made are to be understood in the factual matrix before this Court. 33. We, however, make it clear that our decision in this case and observations made are to be understood in the factual matrix before this Court. Every case must be decided on its own facts and circumstances, for we are dealing with human relationships and psychology which are dynamic and permeated with an array of unpredictable human emotions and sensitivities and hence, every decision relating to human relationships must be based on the peculiar facts and circumstances obtaining in the particular case. 34. In light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and for the reasons discussed above, we are of the opinion that in the present case no prima facie case has been made out about commission of an offence of rape punishable under Section 376 IPC . Further, on perusal of the FIR it is also noted that no allegations of cheating have been made against the appellant to fall within the scope of Section 420 IPC nor of any of the offences under Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC . 35. In our opinion, allowing the criminal proceeding against the appellant in the facts and circumstances to continue, where no criminal liability can be attached, would amount to abuse of the process of court. 36. Consequently, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgement and order dated 12.02.2018 passed by the Bombay High Court in Criminal Writ Petition (CRWP) No. 5190 of 2017 is set aside. Resultantly, the Page 21 of 21 FIR being CR No. 302 of 2017 dated 15.08.2017 registered against the appellant with the Kharghar Police Station, Navi Mumbai under Sections 376 , 420, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code is quashed. 8. On perusal of the entire complaint and the prosecution materials it is forthcoming that, the entire allegation is made against the accused No.1 that on the false promise of marriage he had sexual intercourse with the complainant. The only allegation against the petitioners is that, they are opposing to the marriage of the accused No.1 with the complainant. Mere denial on the part of the petitioners to the marriage would not give a right under law to the complainant to file a case against all the relatives of the accused No.1. The same amounts to abuse of process of law. Mere denial on the part of the petitioners to the marriage would not give a right under law to the complainant to file a case against all the relatives of the accused No.1. The same amounts to abuse of process of law. Since the entire allegation is against accused No.1 and as there are no specific allegation more so in respect of the offences now having been charge-sheeted. That apart, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Judgment cited supra, has clearly held that, the complainant who is otherwise a matured person cannot be said to be deceived on the false promise. As per the complaint averments the first incident of forcible sexual intercourse had occurred on 25.11.2022. Admittedly, the complaint came to be registered on 25.12.2023, i.e., after a period of one year one month. 9. Considering the law declared by the Hon’ble Apex Court supra and the materials produced along with the petition, this Court finds that, continuation of further proceedings against the petitioners in the absence of any specific allegations with respect to the aforesaid offences, would amounts to abuse of process of law. In view of the same, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed; (ii) All further proceedings in Crime No.372/2023 registered by Sub-Urban Police Station, Kalaburagi City, now pending in S.C.No.17/2025 on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi, insofar as the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 7 are concerned, stands quashed. (iii) There is no order as to costs.