Delhi High Court refuses to close case against married man accused of rape on false promise of marriage

The Delhi High Court on Friday declined to close a case against a married man facing charges of rape and unnatural sex for allegedly inducing another woman into a sexual relationship on the false promise of marriage.

Justice Saurabh Banerjee said though the accused was in a sexual relationship with the complainant for a long time, he "strangely" never revealed that he had married another woman in the meantime.

"The same, ipso facto creates a doubt in the mind of this Court to pass any order, at this stage," the Court said.

The Court was hearing a petition moved by the accused challenging the trial court decision to frame charges against him under Sections 376(2)(n) [repeated rape] and 377 (unnatural offences) of the Indian Penal Code.

The accused and complainant had met through the matrimonial platform 'Jeevansathi' around October 2020. According to prosecution, he later travelled from Haridwar to Delhi to discuss marriage.

On January 11, 2021, he allegedly called her to a hotel in Paharganj, where physical relations began on the promise of marriage, and continued at various hotels.

On March 5, 2023, the complainant is stated to have learnt that he had married another woman. This prompted her to register a police case against him.

The counsel for the accused argued that the three-year relationship could not be presumed to be non-consensual throughout, arguing that hotel records showed the complainant herself had submitted her Aadhaar card at hotel check-ins.

He added the victim had established sexual relationship with him even after knowing about his marriage. The State said charges have rightly been framed against the accused. It also said that she was induced by a fresh promise that he would divorce his wife.

Considering the submissions, the Court said that the case calls for a full-fledged trial. It thus upheld the trial court order.

"Keeping in view of the aforesaid analysis and reasoning, the present petition is dismissed and the charges framed against the petitioner under Sections 376(2)(n)/377 of the IPC vide the impugned order dated 30.11.2023 passed by the learned ASJ, (FTSC) (RC), Central District Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in SC No.313/2023 are hereby sustained," the Court said.

The petitioner was represented by advocates Prince Arora, Wazid Ali and Mitabh Gosain.

The State was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Raghuinder Verma, along with advocates Aditya Vikram Singh and Upasna Bakshi.

The complainant was represented by advocate Isha Khanna.