The court determined that allegations of rape based on a false promise of marriage do not hold if the victim is married and both parties consented.

O R D E R

This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre-

arrest bail.

2. The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.288/2025 of Vellikulangara Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66E (b)(c) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant and the defacto complainant got acquainted with each other through ‘Facebook’. According to the prosecution, the applicant, with a false promise to marry the de facto complainant, had sexual intercourse with her for two days in March 2022 and February 2025 by bringing her to a lodge situated in Athirapilly. It is further alleged that on a day in the month of February 2025, the defacto complainant came to a room where the applicant was residing at Kodungallur and there also they had sexual intercourse. The defacto complainant alleged that the applicant recorded her nude images on his mobile phone and further did not return the gold ornaments borrowed from her. Thereby, the applicant has committed the aforesaid offences.

4. I have heard Sri.M.Revikrishnan, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.K.A.Noushad, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's intentional criminal acts, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6. The applicant is the friend of the victim’s husband. The marriage of the victim still subsists. A reading of the FIS would show that the applicant and the victim fell in love and voluntarily had sexual intercourse several times. There is no case for the victim that those sexual intercourse acts were forceful in nature. However, her case is that the applicant promised to marry her and it was based on that promise, she consented to sexual intercourse. The Supreme Court recently held in Prashant v. State of NCT of Delhi [ 2024 (7) KHC 317 ] that when the relationship between the parties was purely consensual and when the victim was aware of the consequences of her action, ingredients of the offence of rape cannot be made out. It was further held that if the victim is a married lady, the allegation of rape on a false promise of marriage will not lie. Admittedly, the victim is a married lady.

7. It is pleaded in ground No.5 of the bail application that the applicant has already surrendered his mobile phone before the investigating officer. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Considering the allegations made against the applicant, his custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The applicant shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.