Live
- ‘One nation, one election’ will undermine India’s federal structure: Mehbooba Mufti
- ‘Bachhala Malli’ trailer heightens anticipation
- Karnataka quota row: Backward Class forum chief warns Lingayat seer over 'tinkering with reservations'
- Tight security arrangements at Group-II examination centers District SP
- Alia Bhatt captures attention in white
- Varun Dhawan talks about ‘Baby John’
- ‘Moonwalk’ trailer promises a quirky heist, love, and loyalty
- Combat leaf spot disease
- Ahsaas Channaopens up about her complex character in ‘Mismatched 3’
- Radhika Apte welcomes first child, shares heartfelt post
Failed romantic relationship not ground for rape case is settled law: Delhi HC
Granting anticipatory bail to a government employee, the Delhi High Court has observed that if a romantic relationship doesn't work out, it should not be the basis for lodging a rape case.
New Delhi: Granting anticipatory bail to a government employee, the Delhi High Court has observed that if a romantic relationship doesn't work out, it should not be the basis for lodging a rape case.
The woman had filed an FIR accusing the man of having physical relations with her on the false pretext of marrying her. She alleged that after getting engaged to the accused, his family started demanding dowry, and when her father refused to provide money, the accused began avoiding her and refused to marry her.
On the contrary, the accused contended that the marriage was called off because the woman and her family did not disclose her medical ailments and that the FIR was lodged to harm his career.
Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain allowed the plea for anticipatory bail, stating that the allegations in the FIR do not suggest that the accused had no intention to marry the woman and had made a false promise of marriage from the beginning.
The judge said that the offense of rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code was not applicable in this case.
"It is a settled law that if a relationship does not work out, the same cannot be a ground for lodging an FIR for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC," Justice Jain observed.
He also noted that the complainant did not disclose any alleged forcible sexual relations with the accused for over four months. It was determined that the matter of whether the petitioner had physical relations with the complainant with her consent or not would be subject to trial and could not be decided without evidence, the court said.
Justice Jain recognised that the petitioner, as a government employee, could suffer irreparable harm to his career if incarcerated in a false case, but there was no risk that he would flee from the trial.
