# Ravi Pal v. State of U.P. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2025) 11 ILRA 448
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2025-11-04
- **Case number:** Application U/S 482. No.24989 of 2024
- **Bench:** Avnish Saxena
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/ravi-pal-v-state-of-u-p-anr-52862
- **Pages:** 5

## Headnote

Anchal Kumar Rao, G.A., Prince Kumar
Srivastava, Rakesh Yadav, Yakub Ali Ansari

Issue for consideration
Matter pertains to false promise of marriage

Headnotes
False promise of marriage-F.I.R. lodged
by the victim -her consistent statement u/s
161 and 164 Cr.P.C.- reveal marriage was
assured by the accused and his parents-
instance was intimated to the Police by the
victim-parents of the accused assured-who
had given consent of marriage at Police
Station-
there
was
intentional
false
promise
of
marriage-direct
nexus
to
influence the consent of the victim-subject
matter of trial. Application dismissed.
(E-9)

Case Law Cited

## Text

448 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Section 141 of the Act, 1881 is attracted
and there is no concept of authorised
liability of the partners as such. The
liability is joint and severe.

25.
Section
25
of
the
Indian
Partnership Act, 1932 also defines that
every partner is liable, jointly with all the
other partners and also severally, for all
acts of the firm done while he is a partner.
In the present case, applicants are partners
and a partnership deed dated 01.05.2016
was reduced in writing for carrying on
business under the name and style of ?M/s
K.D. Overseas? situated at Neelu Kheri,
District Karnal, Haryana, therefore, the
applicants cannot escape from their liability
because a partnership firm is not really a
legal entity separate and distinct and it can
have a legal persona only when it is
considered along with its partners.

26.
Considering
the
arguments
advanced by counsel for the parties and the
evidence on record, this Court is of the
opinion that the trial court has rightly
entertained the complaint and issued
summons against the applicants. Therefore,
no interference is required by this Court in
exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction
under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

27. Both the applications being devoid
of merit, are rejected.
----------
(2025) 11 ILRA 448
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 04.11.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

Application U/S 482. No.24989 of 2024
Ravi Pal .....Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicant:
Jitendra Kumar Pandey, Om Prakash Yadav

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
Anchal Kumar Rao, G.A., Prince Kumar
Srivastava, Rakesh Yadav, Yakub Ali Ansari

Issue for consideration
Matter pertains to false promise of marriage

Headnotes
False promise of marriage-F.I.R. lodged
by the victim -her consistent statement u/s
161 and 164 Cr.P.C.- reveal marriage was
assured by the accused and his parents-
instance was intimated to the Police by the
victim-parents of the accused assured-who
had given consent of marriage at Police
Station-
there
was
intentional
false
promise
of
marriage-direct
nexus
to
influence the consent of the victim-subject
matter of trial. Application dismissed.
(E-9)

Case Law Cited
1. Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Versus State of
Maharashtra and another (2019) 9 SCC 608
2. Sonu alias Subhash Kumar versus State of UP
(2021) 18 SCC 517
3. Amol Bhagwan Nehul versus State of
Maharashtra and another (2025) SCC OnLine SC
1230

List of Acts
Indian Penal Code

List of Keywords
consent of marriage, intentional false promise of
marriage, influence the consent.

Appearances of parties
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Kumar
Pandey, Om Prakash Yadav Counsel for Opposite
Party(s) : Anchal Kumar Rao, G.A., Prince Kumar
Srivastava, Rakesh Yadav, Yakub Ali Ansari

(Delivered by Hon'ble Avnish Saxena, J.)
11 All. Ravi Pal Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
449

1. It is required to mention at the
threshold that on 10.09.2025 this Court has
passed the order that, opposite party no.2,
Ms Shivani Bhatt, present in person and
stated that she is not in a position to engage
a counsel to contest the case, hence,
directed Registrar General to appoint an
Advocate as amicus curiae to represent her.
By subsequent order dated 07.10.2025, this
Court has further made observation that Ms
Shivani Bhatt is already represented by Sri
Prince Kumar Srivastava, Advocate who
was present in the Court along with
opposite party no.2, in person and ready for
arguments. The amicus curiae, therefore,
has not been appointed and with the
consent of parties 14.10.2025 (2.00 p.m.)
fixed for arguments.

2. Heard, Sri Om Prakash Yadav,
learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prince
Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for
opposite party no.2 as well as the opposite
party no.2, in person and Sri S.K. Rai,
learned A.G.A.-I for the State.

3.
Before
dealing
with
the
arguments made by the parties, it would be
expedient to deal with the F.I.R. lodged by
opposite party no.2 on 17.01.2024 against
the applicant-accused, Ankit Pal (brother of
the accused), Mahendra Pal (father of the
accused) and Munni Devi (mother of the
accused) at Police Station Sahjanawa,
District Gorakhpur which was registered at
Case Crime No. 46 of 2024 under Sections
376 and 120-B I.P.C. It is alleged that
opposite party no.2 ('victim' for the sake of
brevity) is resident of Seikhpur, PostDhirauli Babu, Police Station Chhavani,
District Basti, who, since her childhood
was residing with her maternal grand
parents at Village Punda, Post-Rithuakhor,
Police
Station
Sahjanawa,
District
Gorakhpur. Some years' back the victim
came in contact with accused through her
friend Reetu Pandey, later on, they
exchanged their phone numbers and started
chatting. It is during these chats that the
accused has given proposal of marriage to
the victim, but the victim did not trust the
accused, on which the accused has
intimated her that he has disclosed about
the proposal of their marriage with his
family. On 21.11.2023, the accusedapplicant took the victim to his residence at
Bharwaliya
Khurd,
Police
Station
Sipriganj,
District
Gorakhpur
and
introduced her with his parents. The parents
intimated that they have no objection about
the marriage and at their instance the
accused took the victim to his room, where
she stayed from morning till evening and
the accused has committed rape on her on
false assurance of marriage. When she
objected, the accused assured her that he
will certainly marry her. On 23.11.2023,
the accused has taken her to Gorakhpur,
where they have checked in a hotel behind
railway station. They stayed there for the
night and again accused committed rape on
her. On the next day, when the victim has
asked the accused for court marriage, he
started dilly-dallying. She then intimated
the incident to the younger brother of the
accused, Ankit Pal. He has also assured her
that his parents are ready for the marriage
and further assured that his brother will
marry her. She then talked to the father of
the accused, who has refused, on which she
went to Sipriganj Police Station and
intimated the incident to the Darogaji, who
has called the family members of the
accused and entered some paper work.
Thereafter, the accused has taken the victim
to Delhi for visit where she again asked the
accused for the court marriage, but he did
not marry her and only gave false
assurance. She stayed there with the
accused for nearly a month and was
450 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
subjected to rape on these days. On
03.01.2024, the accused has left her alone
at Delhi. The victim states that the accused
applicant
and
his
family
members
committed
conspiracy
and
she
was
subjected to rape by the accused on false
assurance of marriage pursuant to that
conspiracy.

4. The victim has given her
statement under Sections 161 and 164
Cr.P.C. on the same terms.

5. After investigation the Police
has submitted charge-sheet against the
applicant for the offence under Section 376
I.P.C., whereas, other accused namely
Ankit Pal, Mahendra Pal and Munni Devi
were not charge-sheeted.

6. The accused has challenged the
charge-sheet on the ground that the victim
has not disclosed about the details of her
being introduced to the accused applicant;
there was consensual sexual relations
between the applicant and victim; there is
no details and particulars about consent of
parents of the accused for marriage; no
details about proposal of marriage from the
family of the accused or the victim; the
averment in F.I.R. shows that the victim on
her own came to the residence of the
accused, checked in the hotel and went to
Delhi. The F.I.R. is delayed as on
03.01.2024 the victim has stated to be left
by the accused, whereas, the F.I.R. has
been lodged on 17.01.2024.

7. It is stated by the learned
counsel for the applicant accused that date
of birth of victim is 24.01.2001 as per her
high school certificate. There was no
medical corroboration of rape in medical
report. The statement of the victim
recorded under Sections 161 and 164
Cr.P.C. is mere repetition of the contents of
the F.I.R. The accused applicant is innocent
and committed no offence as alleged by the
victim, rather falsely implicated him due to
ulterior motive of the victim. The applicant
has no criminal history and his family has
also been falsely involved just for the
purpose of extortion. The victim has
concocted a story in the F.I.R., though she
was never taken to the residence of the
accused on 21.11.2023. There was no
proposal of marriage and the accused
applicant has not visited Delhi with the
victim, or left her alone on 03.01.2024. The
victim
was
a
consenting
party
and
allegations
were
leveled
against
the
applicant by the victim when she was
caught by the Police at Delhi. The F.I.R. is
frivolous, vexatious and concocted and
abuse of process of law. The Investigating
Officer did not collect any material to
substantiate the offence of rape, but despite
that charge-sheet has been submitted
against accused applicant for offence under
Section 376 I.P.C. He, therefore moved
application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to
quash
the
charge-sheet
and
entire
proceeding of case. In support of his
contention learned counsel has relied on
cases of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar
Versus
State
of
Maharashtra
and
another (2019) 9 SCC 608 (relevant
paragraphs-12,13,14 and 16), Sonu alias
Subhash Kumar versus State of UP
(2021) 18 SCC 517( relevant paragraphs-
8,11 and 12) and Amol Bhagwan Nehul
versus State of Maharashtra and another
(2025) SCC OnLine SC 1230 ( relevant
paragraphs- 9 and 11).

8. Learned A.G.A has submitted
that during the course of investigation the
Investigating
Officer
has
collected
sufficient, credible and cogent material
against the applicant and submitted charge-
11 All. Ravi Pal Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
451
sheet on 05.04.2024 for offence under
Section 376 I.P.C. The Magistrate has
taken cognizance on the charge-sheet and
charge has been framed against the
accused. He further submits that there is no
delay in lodging the F.I.R. The statement of
victim recorded under Sections 161 and
164 Cr.P.C. are intact. The accusedapplicant has entered into sexual relations
with opposite party no. 2, knowing fully
well that he has given false assurance of
marriage. The crime is heinous in nature.
The application moved by the accusedapplicant for quashing the charge-sheet
does not have merit and as such the
application deserves to be dismissed.

9. Learned counsel for opposite
party no. 2 has submitted that the accused
applicant has committed rape on the victim,
despite her objection to enter into physical
relations before the marriage. She made
every endeavour to persuade the accused to
marry her and physical relations would
only be after the marriage, but every time
consent obtained by false assurance of
marriage made by the accused that he will
certainly marry her and committed rape.
This physical relation does not fall in the
category of consented or consensual sex.
The victim went to the Police Station after
23.11.2023 and narrated her plight to
Darogaji. It is on the instance of Police that
the family members of the accusedapplicant were called and some paper work
were undertaken. It is thereafter that the
victim went to Delhi along with accused
with the firm belief that the accused will
marry her, but the accused left her in lurch
on 03.01.2024. The victim was not in a
position to return to her native place and
lodged the F.I.R. after reaching her
maternal grand parents. He submits that the
judgment relied on by the accused
applicant cannot support his case because
the genesis of the proposal of marriage was
false and it was intended by the accused
that he will enter into physical relations
with the victim by giving her false
assurance of marriage. He, therefore,
submits that the application moved by the
applicant is devoid of merit and is liable to
be dismissed.

10. This court has taken into
consideration the rival submissions made
by the parties and perused the record.

11. To appreciate the facts it would
be expedient to quote paragraph-18 of
judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in
Pramod Suryabhan Pawar (supra) relied on
by the applicant:-

 "18. To summarise the legal
position that emerges from the above cases,
the "consent" of a woman with respect to
Section 375 must involve an active and
reasoned
deliberation
towards
the
proposed act. To establish whether the
"consent" was vitiated by a "misconception
of fact" arising out of a promise to marry,
two propositions must be established. The
promise of marriage must have been a false
promise, given in bad faith and with no
intention of being adhered to at the time it
was given. The false promise itself must be
of immediate relevance, or bear a direct
nexus to the woman's decision to engage in
the sexual act."

12. The allegations contained in F.I.R.
lodged by the victim and her consistent
statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164
Cr.P.C. reveal the following facts which are
required to be considered on the face of it to
ascertain as to whether the promise of marriage
was false at its very inception and its sole
purpose was to fetch consent of the victim:
452 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
 i) The victim, since her childhood,
was residing with her maternal grand parents at
Gorakhpur away from her parents, who resided
at Basti. This evinces the psychology of victim.

 ii) The first instance mentioned in the
F.I.R. of committing rape is of 21.11.2023,
when the accused-applicant is alleged to have
taken the victim to his residence, where the
marriage was assured by the accused and his
parents.

 iii) Subsequent instance is of
23.11.2023, when the accused has allegedly
taken the victim to a hotel at Gorakhpur and
committed rape. This instance was intimated to
the Police by the victim.

 iv) The third instance is of taking the
victim to Delhi. This was allegedly on the
assurance of parents of the accused, who had
given consent of marriage at Police Station,
when they were called at Police Station
Sipriganj, Gorakhpur.

13. All these instances mentioned in
the F.I.R. and statement of victim, on the face of
it shows that there was intentional false promise
of marriage, which has direct nexus to influence
the consent of the victim and are subject matter
of trial.

14. In the case of Pramod Suryabhan
Pawar (supra) the accused was Deputy
Commandant in CRPF, while the victim was
Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax and
Hon'ble Supreme Court found that allegations
in the F.I.R. did not on the face of it indicate
that the promise by the appellant was false, or
that the complainant engaged in sexual relations
on the basis of this promise.

15. In case of Sonu alias Subhash
Kumar (supra) relied on by the accused
applicant is based on different facts, wherein the
victim developed voluntary relations of
husband and wife with accused after falling in
love with the accused. It is thereafter that
accused and family members refused to marry
her, which led to the lodging of the F.I.R.

16. The case of Amol Bhagwan
Nehul (supra) is on different fact. In that case
allegation of sexual intercourse on false
promise of marriage was levelled by the
complainant
whose
first
marriage
was
subsisting and the accused-appellant, 23 years
of age, was a student of Bachelor of Science
(Agriculture) and the victim used to visit the
college of accused. In this backdrop, Hon'ble
the Supreme Court has made observation that
the consent was not the outcome of inducement
or misrepresentation.

17. Therefore, the cited cases relied on
by the applicant are of no help to the applicant.

18. In view of the foregoing
discussions, the application moved by the
applicant is devoid of merit and deserves to be
dismissed.

19. The application under Section 482
Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, dismissed. The interim
order dated 01.08.2024 stands vacated.
----------
(2025) 11 ILRA 452
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 20.11.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

Application U/S 528 BNSS. No. 34844 of 2025

Wasiullah & Ors. ...Applicants
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicants: