In an order scrutinising the evolving nature of adult relationships and the application of rape laws in cases of alleged breach of promise to marry, the Bombay High Court granted anticipatory bail to a Thane resident accused of rape, causing miscarriage, and assault. Justice Milind N. Jadhav, while allowing the application, made prima facie observations that a prolonged, seemingly consensual relationship between two adults could not easily be classified as rape merely because it eventually soured.
The Allegations. As per the FIR registered at Vishnu Nagar Police Station, Thane, the complainant — separated but not divorced from her husband — met the applicant in November 2017, who allegedly professed love and promised marriage. It was alleged that from 2017 to 2024 he repeatedly forced a physical relationship on her, tied a “fake mangalsutra,” took obscene photographs, and forced her to terminate two pregnancies in 2021 and 2022. The complaint was triggered in September 2024 after the applicant allegedly expressed a desire for a physical relationship with the complainant's minor daughter.
The Defence. Advocate Bhagyesha Kurane argued the FIR was “frivolous,” stemming from a consensual relationship gone sour, noting both parties knew marriage was legally impossible and that the relationship continued without complaint until March 2024. She presented medical reports suggesting the complainant had consented to the terminations, and argued the seven-year delay in reporting undermined the lack-of-consent claim.
The State, represented by APP Hitendra Dedhia, countered that the complainant's silence stemmed from hope the applicant would marry her once her divorce was finalised, and that his alleged advance toward her minor daughter revealed his “sinister intentions” and the marriage promise as a “ploy to exploit her.”
The Court's Analysis. Justice Jadhav noted both parties were major, above 30, and had engaged in a relationship for nearly seven years involving regular visits and frequent communication. “In such circumstances, the likelihood of a non-committal consensual relationship later turning sour cannot be ruled out prima facie,” he observed, relying on Mahesh Balkrishna Dandane Vs. State of Maharashtra (2014): “Every breach of promise to marry cannot be said to be either a cheating or rape.” On the miscarriage charge, the court found it prima facie suspect that the complainant consented to the terminations in 2021 and 2022 but raised it as a forceful act only in 2024, alongside other allegations, describing it as possible “recrimination” after the relationship soured.
Bail Conditions. The court granted anticipatory bail on a Personal Recognizance Bond of ₹25,000 with sureties, with conditions including a prohibition on tampering with evidence, monthly attendance at the police station, and mandatory surrender of his mobile phone and laptop to the investigating officer. The court clarified its observations were prima facie and confined to the bail application, with the trial court to decide the case on its own merits.
