The Court observed that the complainant was a major who had voluntarily entered into an interfaith marriage.The Rajasthan High Court has quashed an FIR alleging rape, cheating and other offences against a man whose wife claimed that she had been induced into an interfaith marriage through drugs, medicines and black magic. The Court held that once the parties had voluntarily solemnised a marriage under the Special Marriage Act, obtained protection from the High Court as a married couple and subsequently had a child, continuation of the criminal proceedings amounted to an abuse of the process of law.Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand held that the offence of rape under Section 376 IPC was not made out against the petitioner, who was the legally wedded husband of the complainant, and found that the remaining allegations also failed to disclose a prima facie case.The Court observed:"The registration of the impugned FIR is nothing but abuse of the process of law."BackgroundThe petitioner approached the Rajasthan High Court seeking quashing of an FIR registered in 2025 for offences under Sections 419, 420, 384, 376(2)(n), 344, 327, 328, 120B and 376D of the Indian Penal Code.According to the petitioner, the complainant was a major woman who, after obtaining a divorce from her first husband, voluntarily married him under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 before the Additional District Magistrate, Jaipur, on 21.11.2022. Their marriage was duly registered and a marriage certificate was issued by the competent authority.The petitioner further stated that because the marriage was an interfaith marriage, the couple faced threats from their respective family members. They jointly approached the authorities seeking protection and also filed a criminal writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court seeking protection of their life and liberty.The couple thereafter lived together as husband and wife and a daughter was born to them on 14.10.2024.However, in 2025, nearly three years after the marriage and about one year after the birth of their daughter, the complainant lodged the impugned FIR alleging that the petitioner had administered drugs and medicines, practised black magic upon her, fraudulently induced her to marry him against her wishes and repeatedly subjected her to sexual assault.The petitioner argued that the allegations were inherently improbable in light of the undisputed marriage, the earlier protection proceedings initiated jointly by the parties and the birth of their child. He argued that since the complainant was his legally wedded wife, the offence of rape under Section 376 IPC was not attracted in view of Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC. He further submitted that the FIR was a clear abuse of the criminal process.The State and the complainant opposed the petition, contending that the complainant had been manipulated through drugs, medicines and black magic into dissolving her earlier marriage and entering into the second marriage. They also argued that after investigation, the police had filed a chargesheet and the trial court had framed charges under Sections 419, 420, 384, 327, 328, 344 and 120B IPC, along with Section 6(2) of the Rajasthan Prevention of Witch-Hunting Act, 2015. It was therefore submitted that the quashing petition deserved to be dismissed.Court Relies on Marriage Records and Parties' Earlier ConductAfter examining the record, the High Court found that several undisputed facts substantially undermined the prosecution's case.The Court noted that the complainant was a major at the time of marriage and had voluntarily solemnised the marriage under the Special Marriage Act before the competent Marriage Officer on 21.11.2022. The marriage had also been formally registered and a marriage certificate had been issued.The Bench further noted that shortly after the marriage, both spouses had jointly approached the Rajasthan High Court seeking protection from their family members on the ground that they had married of their own free will and apprehended threats to their life and liberty.The Court also took into account the fact that the parties had lived together as husband and wife and that a daughter was born from the marriage on 14.10.2024.According to the Court, these undisputed circumstances assumed significance when the complainant, after nearly three years of marriage and about a year after the birth of the child, alleged that she had been induced into the marriage through drugs, medicines and black magic.Rape Charge Not Maintainable Against Legally Wedded HusbandThe principal allegation in the FIR was that the petitioner had repeatedly committed rape upon the complainant.Examining the contention, the High Court referred to the definition of rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, including Exception 2, which provides that sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife (subject to the statutory age requirement applicable at the relevant time) does not constitute rape.The Court also relied upon the Supreme Court's decisions in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India and Kuldeep Singh v. State of Punjab, where the legal effect of Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC was considered.Relying particularly on Kuldeep Singh, the High Court observed that once the parties were legally married, the offence under Section 376 IPC could not be sustained against the husband in the facts of the present case.The Court observed:"The offence punishable under Section 376 is not made out, as he is covered under the Exception 2 appended to Section 375 IPC."The High Court further held that the other allegations contained in the FIR also failed to disclose a prima facie case.The Bench observed that the complainant had not only entered into a registered marriage with the petitioner but had also jointly sought police and judicial protection for the relationship and continued to reside with him for years thereafter.In these circumstances, the Court found the subsequent allegations that she had been compelled into marriage through drugs, medicines and black magic to be inconsistent with the contemporaneous record.The Court also noted that despite filing of the chargesheet and framing of charges by the Sessions Court, the petition seeking quashing of the FIR remained maintainable in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Mukesh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, where it was held that the High Court's power to quash criminal proceedings survives even after filing of the chargesheet if continuation of the prosecution amounts to an abuse of process.Having considered the overall circumstances, the High Court concluded that the criminal prosecution could not be permitted to continue. The Court observed that the complainant was a major who had voluntarily entered into an interfaith marriage, jointly sought protection for that marriage and gave birth to a child before lodging the impugned FIR several years later.The Bench held that permitting the prosecution to proceed in such circumstances would amount to misuse of the criminal justice system.As the Court observed:"The registration of the impugned FIR is nothing but abuse of the process of law."Allowing the petition, the Rajasthan High Court quashed FIR No. 299 of 2025 registered at Police Station Udhyog Nagar, District Sikar, along with all consequential criminal proceedings arising from it. The Court held that no prima facie case was made out against the petitioner and that continuation of the prosecution would constitute an abuse of the process of law.S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5664/2025 URN: CRLMP / 13105U / 2025R v State of Rajasthan & Anr.Date of Decision: 17.07.2026Appearance:For Petitioner(s): Mr. Sushil Pujari Mr. Rahul Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s): Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP Mr. Ashutosh Bhatia(The author of this article, Vatsal Chandra is a Delhi-based Advocate practicing before the courts of Delhi NCR.)