* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: April 17, 2026 + BAIL APPLN. 559/2026 KARAMVEER RATHI .....Applicant Through: Mr. Tanveer Ahmed Mir, Sr.

Advocate with Mr. Daksh Sachdeva, Advocates Versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP for the State with Mr. Gaurav Singh, Ms. Upasna Bakshi and Ms. Divya Bakshi, Advocates alongwith SI Gunjan Sirohi, PS Rajouri Garden Mr. Anuj Kapoor, Mr. Shivam Sethi and Mr. Nandeesh Nanda, Advocates for complainant CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE J U D G M E N T (Oral)

1. By virtue of the present application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in proceedings arising out of FIR No.580/2025 dated 11.11.2025 registered at PS: Rajouri Garden under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 69/351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

2. As per FIR, the complainant/ prosecutrix came in contact with the applicant in the year 2022 which led to their friendship. They, thereafter, entered into a live-in relationship, and were residing together in a flat in Subhash Nagar and the applicant promised to marry the prosecutrix and on that assurance, established physical relations with her without her consent by coercing her and insisting that they are about to get married anyway. To assure the prosecutrix further, the applicant also made her meet his younger sister and brothers and some other relatives. They also travelled together to Dubai (U.A.E.), Goa and Kashmir. The applicant continued to reassure the prosecutrix of his intention to marry her and established physical relations with her on that pretext. Thereafter, the behaviour of the applicant changed and he began to verbally abuse and physically assault the prosecutrix under the influence of alcohol every time she confronted him with his promise to marry her.

3. Though the applicant once again repeated his promise to marry the prosecutrix in December, 2024, he kept postponing the same by giving some excuse or the other, and eventually when she seriously confronted him again with regard to the marriage, days before registration of the FIR, he physically attacked her and ran away, and was untraceable thereafter for three days. Then, on 28.10.2025, the applicant contacted the prosecutrix via a phone call and threatened her with physical harm, whereafter the prosecutrix contacted his mother, and during the interaction, she discovered that the applicant was already married and had a four-year-old daughter, which had never been disclosed to her by him or his relatives whom she had met. Hence, she approached the Police for sexual, physical and emotional abuse and cheating which led to registration of the present FIR.

4. The applicant was arrested in relation to the FIR on 12.11.2025. The chargesheet has since been filed and the case is now at the stage of framing of charges.

5. Based on the aforesaid, learned senior counsel for the applicant submits that the present is a false and fabricated case and no offence under Section 69 BNS is made out against the applicant, primarily, since the prosecutrix, who is an educated woman employed as an Air Hostess having sufficient exposure, was involved in a consensual three-year-long relationship with the applicant out of her own free will and volition, and as such, it is highly unlikely that she was completely unaware that he was already married and had a daughter, and that she established a sexual relationship with him on a false pretext of marriage and continued to be misguided for such a long period of time. The learned senior counsel drawn attention of this Court to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Samadhan vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.:2025 SCC OnLine SC 2528 as also of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Manish Kumar vs. State:2025:DHC:7719 and of this Court in Sushant Kaushik vs. State [order dated 31.10.2023 in Bail Appln.3175/2023] in s