A consensual relationship should not automatically be interpreted as rape on the basis of a broken promise of marriage, emphasizing the need to consider context and intentions behind consent.

ORDER :

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

Petitioner apprehends arrest in Crime No. 531 of 2025 of Thrikkakara Police Station, which is registered alleging offences punishable under sections 376 and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Hence, he has filed this application under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , seeking anticipatory bail.

2. According to the F.I.R, the accused had, in August 2021, raped the defacto complainant at her apartment in Kozhikode and thereafter promised to marry her and committed sexual intercourse with her repeatedly on 30.03.2022, 22.06.2022 and again in August, 2022 and March, 2023, and thereby committed the offences alleged. The F.I.R was registered on 31.07.2025 alleging incidents that occurred during the period from 01.08.2021 to 31.03.2023.

3. Petitioner claims to be a musician who has staged various performances and is stated to be a budding star in the field. He alleges that there are various persons circulating threats after forming a group, intending to tarnish his image. Petitioner alleges that it was at this juncture that the defacto complainant has filed her complaint alleging that he had engaged in a physical relationship with her, promising to marry her and thereafter, despite repeated sexual intercourse under the promise of marriage, he backed out of the said promise and thereby committed the offences alleged. Apprehending arrest in the above crime, this bail application has been filed.

4. The defacto complainant has impleaded herself as an additional respondent. In her impleading petition, it is alleged that the petitioner had sexually abused several other victims and granting bail to him would seriously impact their lives. It was also pointed out that the petitioner himself had tendered an apology when the “MeToo movement” intensified in the country and in the year 2021, he made a public apology through his Instagram account. Referring to certain news reports, it was pointed out that various women have been abused by the petitioner and hence, he ought not be granted anticipatory bail. The defacto complainant also stated that after she filed her complaint, she has been receiving several threatening calls from various persons and there has been a cyber attack against her and a visual media even published details which could identify the victim, for which a complaint has already been lodged. The defacto complainant is stated to be under psychiatric treatment for the last two years for recovering from the psychological trauma that she had to undergo after the rape committed by the petitioner and thus the defacto complainant objected to the prayer for grant of bail.

5. Sri. S. Rajeev, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the prosecution allegations are false and no such incident as alleged had taken place. It was further submitted that, even if the entire allegations are admitted for the purpose of arguments sake, still, it will only reveal a consensual relationship by persons who were in a relationship, which did not ultimately crystallize into a marriage for reasons of incompatibility. The learned counsel also submitted that the statement of the defacto complainant will clearly reveal that throughout they were maintaining a romantic relationship and the physical relationship was always consensual and further that the last incident was in the month of March, 2023