The central legal point established in the judgment is that the conditions provided in the Sonu judgment must be satisfied to oust an offense under Section 376 of the IPC.

JUDGMENT :

SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA, J.

1. A very interesting exception is required to be dealt with by this Court, as it has been sought to be attracted by the learned counsel for the applicant, wherein, an attempt has been made by the counsel for the applicant to bring his case within the framework of the ratio of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter Sonu alias Subhash Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Another, 2021 SCC Online SC 181, which has been relied by this Court in a number of other subsequent judgments.

2. The attempt made by the learned counsel for the applicant was to portray, that this was a case of consensual relationship established, under a false pretext of marriage, hence would not be an offence under Section 376 of the IPC.

3. If principally, the ratio as propounded by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the judgment of Sonu (Supra), is considered to oust an offence under Section 376 of the IPC, the governing circumstances as provided therein, is given in the Para 8 of the said judgment, which is extracted hereunder:

“8. The contents of the FIR as well as the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. leave no manner of doubt that, on the basis of the allegations as they stand, three important features emerge:

(i) The relationship between the appellant and the second respondent was of a consensual nature.

(ii) The parties were in the relationship for about a period of one and a half years.

(iii) Subsequently, the appellant had expressed a disinclination to marry the second respondent which led to the registration of the FIR.”

4. In the judgment of Sonu (Supra), the prime elements were:

(i) Establishment of a consensual relationship.

(ii) The parties were in relationship for a sufficient long period.

(iii) That there was a denial to marry.

5. Factually, as far as the instant C-482 Application is concerned, which emanates from charge-sheet No. 66 of 2022, as submitted on 8th August, 2022, as a consequence of the culmination of the investigation to the allegation in the FIR No. 35 of 2022, on which, the cognizance has been taken by an order dated 22nd September, 2022, and the summoning order, which has issued on 7th October, 2022, had resulted into the registration of a Criminal Case No. 733 of 2022, State vs. Manish Tamta @ Manish Kumar, for the offences under Sections 376 and 417 of the IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, which is being sought to be brought within the aforesaid ambit of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court of Sonu (Supra) to take the benefit to contend that it was not an offence under Section 376 of the IPC.

6. In order to deal with the argument extended by the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court has to ensure as to whether as per the FIR No. 35 of 2022, dated 16th April, 2022, whether, it at all, satisfied the three conditions provided in Para 8 of the said judgment of Sonu (Supra). On a simplicitor narration of the facts in the “FIR” are, that the victim, had contacted the present applicant in year 2020, and they continuously talked on phone. It is not a case of the complainant, that in any of the conversation made on a telephone, there was an assurance of marriage.

7. The cordial relationship between a major male and a major female, in this modern world, may not be always construed to be thought of, that it was a relationship intended to establish a physical relationship. Getting together of a major male and female is quite a regular phenomena in this world, and now society too, and which cannot be looked into from a very narrow perspective, that it is always intended to establish a physical relationship. It is not the case of the complainant in the FIR, that after entering into a conversation in 2020, she was ever given an assurance by the applicant to get married.

8. That as per FIR, for the first time, it is said that when she has visited on an occasion of marriage of her friend, she met with the present applicant, and on 25th April, 2021, there was an establishment of the physical rel