THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Anjan Moni Kalita, J.
Kaushik Das, Son Of Late Bhupen Das – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam Represented By The Pp – Respondent
AB 163 of 2026
Decided On : 24-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for pre-arrest bail filed. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. contentions regarding consent and relationship dynamics. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court's analysis of relationship and consent. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. validation of consensual relationships from legal precedents. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. interim bail order made absolute. (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
Anjan Moni Kalita, J.
Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A. V. Singh, learned counsel for the accused-applicant. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, representing the State respondent as well as Ms. N. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2.
2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, by the accused- applicant, seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Rangiya Police Station Case No. 19/2026, registered under Sections 318(2)/64/69/89/351(2) of the BNS, 2023.
3. An FIR was lodged on 22.01.2026, by one Dr. Jeshie Kalita, alleging, inter alia, that one Mr. Kaushik Das (accused-applicant) and she got involved in a love relationship since the month of March, 2020 and from the very inception of relationship, the accused-applicant has been repeatedly promising to marry her by portraying her as his future wife; that in furtherance of such promise, the accused-applicant proposed her with an engagement ring in the month of February, 2021, which was known to the friends and family members of both of them; that the accused-applicant had taken her with him to Delhi when his father was undergoing some medical treatment at Medanta Hospital, Delhi; that during that period, the Informant stayed with him and his family members to take care of his ailing father; that she had gone to Delhi again in the last week of March, 2024 for medical treatment of the father of the accused-applicant; that however, subsequently, on 10th May, 2024, the father of the accused-applicant expired in Delhi and she accompanied the accused-applicant’s mother and sister from their house in Delhi to his native place in Rangiya; that the accused-applicant repeatedly assured her that he would marry her in front of his family members thereby, gained her complete thrust and emotional dependence; that the accused-applicant has executed a written declaration on a stamp paper dated 13th September, 2020 wherein he clearly promised to marry her; that due to such promises, the Informant consented to physical relationship with him, however, shockingly, it later became apparent that the promise of marriage was false, dishonest and made solely for the purpose of sexually exploiting her vitiating her consent; that the Informant got pregnant on or around 10th July, 2024 but when she informed the accused-applicant and his family members about the pregnancy, instead of taking care of her, they subjected her to threats, pressure and emotional coercion to terminate the pregnancy against her wishes; that after abortion, the accused-applicant refused to marry her and he and his family members started avoiding her and started abusing and humiliating her verbally and blamed her solely for the pregnancy and the subsequent abortion; that due such happenings in her life, she could not take the NEET examination in the year 2025; that the intention of the accused-applicant was dishonest from the very beginning as he got into the relationship solely on false promise of marriage and only for his own sexual gratification; that in fact, she wanted to take the extreme step of committing suicide in couple of occasions, however, despite of knowledge of such attempts, the accused-applicant and his family members deliberately continued to avoid her and, in fact, abused her which has become unbearable for her. The Informant contended that due to such treatment and exploitation of her sexually on false promise of marriage by the Accused Applicant, the Informant has filed the instant FIR.
4. On receipt of the FIR, the police registered Rangiya Police Station Case No.
A consensual relationship that ends unfavorably cannot be criminalized; the burden lies on proving coercion and lack of consent for allegations of sexual exploitation.
The court found that a breakup of a consensual relationship does not amount to a criminal act, affirming that relationships characterized by mutual consent should not invoke criminal liability upon t....
Point of Law : In view of the settled position of the law as discussed above, applicant/accused has carved out a strong case of anticipatory bail in his favor. The anticipatory bail granted to applic....
The court emphasized the difference between consent given with full knowledge and consent given under a misconception of fact. It held that consent given under a misconception of fact would not be co....
Anticipatory bail granted in rape case on promise to marry where consensual love affair turned sour, distinguishing false promise ab initio vitiating consent from mere breach, absent need for custodi....
The court emphasized that continuous consensual relationships should not lead to criminal charges of rape unless compelling evidence of deception is established, reflecting the need to distinguish be....
Consent to engage in a sexual relationship is not vitiated by a promise of marriage unless the promise is proven to be made in bad faith or with no intention to adhere to it from inception.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.