The Uttarakhand High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of raping a woman on the alleged pretext of marriage, making a significant observation that not every consensual relationship can be termed coercive simply because it did not end in marriage.
Court Upholds Precious Right to Personal Liberty
The court, emphasizing the fundamental right to personal liberty, stated that Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees a "very precious" right which should be curtailed only in exceptional circumstances. This ruling was delivered in December by a single bench of Justice Alok Verma on an anticipatory bail plea connected to a complaint filed earlier in 2024 in Udham Singh Nagar district.
Details of the Case and the Allegations
The case originated from an FIR lodged by a 27-year-old woman at Jaspur police station on May 9. She alleged that she had been in a relationship with the accused for eight years and that he had established physical relations with her on the promise of marriage but later refused to marry her. Based on her complaint, the accused was booked under Sections 69 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
During the hearing, the defence counsel argued that the woman was an adult of sound understanding and the relationship was entirely consensual. They further submitted that the accused had never made any promise of marriage, had no prior criminal record, was a permanent resident of Udham Singh Nagar, and had complied with all conditions of an interim bail granted to him on May 21. The state counsel, however, opposed the anticipatory bail plea.
Court's Reasoning and Reference to Supreme Court
Justice Verma, while granting relief, clarified that the court was not commenting on the merits of the case. The bench observed that whether a breach of promise to marry amounts to rape depends on whether the man had no intention to marry from the very beginning—a fact that can only be conclusively established during a full trial.
"Every failed relationship does not become a false pretext to marry," the court remarked. This line of reasoning aligns with a recent Supreme Court observation. In April 2024, the Supreme Court had set aside a Calcutta High Court order and quashed rape and cheating charges against a retired judicial officer, stating that not every consensual relationship where marriage is discussed can be criminalized.
The apex court had expressed concern over a "growing tendency to initiate criminal proceedings when relationships turn sour," calling such misuse of law an abuse of the judicial process.
The Final Bail Order
After considering arguments from both sides, the Uttarakhand High Court found no compelling reason to deny the accused protection from arrest. The court directed that in the event of his arrest, he be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs 30,000 and two reliable sureties of the same amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.
This ruling underscores the judiciary's effort to draw a clear distinction between genuine cases of sexual assault and the criminalization of personal relationships that end acrimoniously, while steadfastly protecting the constitutional right to liberty.
