Delhi High Court has said in an important decision that breaking of every promise cannot be seen as a false promise of marriage. This decision has come in a case in which a 20-year-old youth was accused of raping his neighbor for two years by falsely promising her marriage. While granting bail to the accused, the court said that the case appears to be of a consensual relationship and it is not appropriate to consider it as a case of rape.
Let us tell you that the complainant had alleged that the accused called her to hotels several times and had physical relations with her and kept avoiding talking about marriage every time. Once they even went to Tis Hazari Court for marriage registration, but the accused allegedly left from there on the pretext of calling his parents and did not return. According to available information, the complainant also tried to contact the parents of the accused, but was unsuccessful.
Justice Ravindra Dudeza said in his order that there is a difference between a false promise and a breach of promise. The court made it clear that if the accused had no intention of marriage from the beginning and made a false promise only to have physical relations, then it would fall in the category of rape. But if there was genuine intention of marriage and for some reason later it could not be consummated, it cannot in every case be considered as fraud.
Citing WhatsApp chats, the court said that initially there was a consensual and loving relationship between the two, in which there was no sign of deception. It is worth noting that things like threats of suicide by the complainant several times and pressurizing for forced marriage also came to light, which makes it clear that the relationship has deteriorated over time and become controversial.
The court also said that the charges framed under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code are serious, but the criminal law should not be misused when a consensual relationship has deteriorated. Describing the right to personal liberty as paramount, the Court said that if the allegations appear to be exaggerated or malicious, then it is justified to grant bail to the accused.
The case is registered as ‘Sumit vs State (NCT of Delhi)’ and further hearing has been scheduled on a future date.