The appellant, Ravish Singh Rana, and the respondent ‘X’ met on Facebook in February 2021 and started a live-in relationship. They lived together in a rented room in Khatima for over two years. On November 19, 2023, they signed a settlement agreement expressing mutual love and intention to marry. However, on November 23, 2023, ‘X’ filed an FIR accusing the appellant of repeatedly establishing a physical relationship with a promise to marry, but later refusing marriage and threatening her. The FIR was registered under Sections 376 (rape), 323, 504, and 506 of the IPC. The appellant’s application to quash the FIR and proceedings was rejected by the Uttarakhand High Court. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and quashed the FIR and subsequent proceedings, highlighting that the parties had lived together consensually for over two years, which created a presumption of valid consent. The Court emphasized that a mere breach of promise to marry does not amount to rape unless there is evidence the promise was false from the start. It also noted that the settlement agreement expressing mutual love negated the allegations of forcible relations. Recognizing changing social dynamics, the Court affirmed that financially independent women have the right to make conscious decisions about their relationships on their own terms.