A charge of sexual assault based on a false promise of marriage cannot be sustained when the accused's prior marriage is still subsisting, and such circumstances, alongside a consensual relationship with no criminal history, favor granting pre-arrest bail.

ORDER

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 accused in Crime No.285/2026 of Pudukkadu Police Station, Thrissur District. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant sexually assaulted the victim for the period from 01.10.2025 to

09.12.2026 after giving false promise of marriage.

4. I have heard Sri.M.G.Jeevan, the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt. Sreeja V., 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. I went through the FIS. It would show that both the victim and the applicant are married persons. The victim had divorced her husband. However, the marriage of the applicant with his wife still subsists. Therefore, there cannot be any question of promise of marriage by the applicant when his marriage is subsisting. A reading of the FIS would show that the applicant and the victim were in live-in relationship from 01.10.2025 to 10.02.2026. They had consensual physical relationship. 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.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation. (vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.