IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the voluntariness of consent in sexual relationships, especially in cases involving false promises of marriage.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned Senior Counsel duly assisted by Mr. Pranav Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Satish Kumar, learned counsel for the informant as also Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Phulwarisharif P.S. Case No. 513 of 2023 for the offence registered under Sections 376(1), 379, 323, 354, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 01.04.2023 by the informant, Purnima Tiwari.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant is a widow blessed with three child and as she was unable to look after them and cater to their needs, she met with the petitioner who on the pretext of false promise of marriage made physical relationship with her. According to her, this continued for years. When the informant came to know that he is having relationship with another lady and upon making query from his parents, she was abused and thrown out from the house and further came to know that the petitioner is already married, the FIR

4. Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that from the First Information Report itself, it is clear that the petitioner entered into physical relationship on her own and the allegation of false promise of marriage is fit to be rejected, so far as the consideration of anticipatory bail is concerned. His submission is that these are the things which are to be taken into account at the time of trial.

5. In support of his case, he has cited an order of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. reported in (2019) 18 SCC 191 with specific reference to paragraph nos. 18 and 20 which read as follows:-

18. In Uday v. State of Karnataka, this Court was considering a case where the prosecutrix, aged about 19 years, had given consent to sexual intercourse with the accused with whom she was deeply in love, on a promise that he would marry her on a later date. The prosecutrix continued to meet the accused and often had sexual intercourse and became pregnant. A complaint was lodged on failure of the accused to marry her. It was held that consent cannot be said to be given under a misconception of fact. It was held thus: (SCC pp. 56-57, paras 21 & 23)

"21. It therefore appears that the consensus of judicial opinion is in favour of the view that the consent given by the prosecutrix to sexual intercourse with a person with whom she is deeply in love on a promise that he would marry her on a later date, cannot be said to be given under a misconception of fact. A false promise is not a fact within the meaning of the Code. We are inclined to agree with this view, but we must add that there is no straitjacket formula for determining whether consent given by the prosecutrix to sexual intercourse is voluntary, or whether it is given under a misconception of fact. In the ultimate analysis, the tests laid down by the courts provide at best guidance to the judicial mind while considering a question of consent, but the court must, in each case, consider the evidence before it and the surrounding circumstances, before reaching a conclusion, because each case has its own peculiar facts which may have a bearing on the question whether the consent was voluntary, or was given under a misconception of fact. It must also weigh the evidence keeping in view the fact that the burden is on the prosecution to prove each and every ingredient of the offence, absence of consent being one of them.

23. Keeping in view the approach that the court must adopt in such cases, we shall now proceed to consider the evidence on record. In the instant case, the prosecutrix was a grown-up girl studying in a college. She was deeply in love with the appellant. She was, however, aware of the fact that since they belonged to different castes, marriage was not possible. In any event the proposal for their marriage was bound to be seriously opposed by their family members. She admits h