"Extramarital Consensual Relation": Delhi High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Man Accused Of Committing Rape On Pretext Of Marriage
The accused petitioner approached the Delhi High Court seeking anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 376 IPC.
Justice Girish Kathpalia, Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of committing rape on the false promise of marriage in a case of a long-term relationship. The High Court found substance in the submission of the accused/applicant that, prima facie, it appeared to be a clear case of extramarital consensual relation.
The accused petitioner approached the High Court seeking anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 376 of the IPC.
The Single Bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia stated, “Considering the overall circumstances described above, I find substance in the submission of learned counsel for accused/applicant that prima facie, it appears to be a clear case of extramarital consensual relations between the accused/applicant and the prosecutrix; and that it is not believable that across such long period of relationship, the prosecutrix would have remained in dark about marital status of the accused/applicant.”
Factual Background
The prosecutrix, a 28-year-old educated lady, employed as a consultant and frequently travelling abroad, alleged that she came in contact with the accused applicant while working on a project under the Ministry of Women & Child Development. It was alleged that the accused, who was employed with PricewaterhouseCoopers India, started texting her frequently when their professional relationship converted into a personal one.
It was the case of the prosecutrix that the accused/applicant never disclosed that he was already married. In the year 2019, the accused/applicant proposed to her and expressed his desire to marry her within a year or two. Over a period of time, their relationship got stronger, and they continued their sexual relations. It was alleged that in the year 2023, when the couple went on a trip, the prosecutrix accessed his mobile phone and discovered the pictures and WhatsApp chats revealing that he was already married and dating other women. When she confronted him about his marital status, he slapped her, accusing her of violating his privacy. The accused/applicant would try to revive their relationship, but the posecutrix refused, and later the FIR came to be lodged against the accused.
Reasoning
On a perusal of the facts and overall circumstances of the case, the Bench found force in the submission of the accused/applicant that prima facie, it appeared to be a case of extramarital consensual relations and that it was not believable that the prosecutrix would have remained in the dark about the marital status of the accused/applicant for such a long period of relationship,
“Nothing prevented the prosecutrix from lodging such complaint wherever she was residing in January 2023, when the alleged fraud was revealed to her from mobile phone of the accused/applicant. Looking into the above described profile of the prosecutrix, it also cannot be a case that she was scared to take action against the accused/applicant in time”, the Bench mentioned.
The Bench also clarified that such observations were for the limited purpose of deciding the issue of liberty of the accused/applicant.
Allowing the application, the Bench ordered, “The application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the accused/applicant shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the IO/SHO. It is also directed that the petitioner shall join investigation, as and when directed by the IO in in writing.”
Cause Title: Manish Kumar v. State (Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:7719)
Appearance
Petitioner: Advocates Yogesh Sharma, Pratima
Respondent: APP Nawal Kishore Jha, Advocates Nitish Banka, Lakshay Manchanda, SI Neetu, PS C.R. Park