No Right To Exploit Fiancée Sexually Against Her Consent During The Period Intervening Engagement & Marriage: PH High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that merely because the parties are engaged and are meeting each other, it doesn't give any right or liberty to the proposed bridegroom to sexually exploit the fiancée without her consent.

"The petitioner cannot get any leverage to physically exploit the fiancée against the consent during the period intervening the engagement and the marriage," the Bench of Justice Vivek Puri observed as it denied anticipatory bail to a man who has been implicated in a rape case by his fiancée.

The case in brief

The Roka Ceremony of Petitioner (Prospective Bridegroom) and his fiancée (Victim) was held on January 30, 2022, and the date of marriage was fixed for December 6, 2022, with the consent of the family. On June 18, 2022, the prosecutrix was taken to a room in a hotel wherein despite her reluctance, the petitioner entered into a physical relationship with the prosecutrix and also made her videos.

Subsequently, on July 17, 2022, the mother of the petitioner (Prospective Bridegroom) informed the mother-in-law of the sister of the prosecutrix that the petitioner is quarreling for the last two months at home as he does not want to solemnize marriage with the prosecutrix.

It was the case of the petitioner that when his family came to know that the prosecutrix was having love affairs with other male friends, they decided to call off the marriage on July 2, 2022.

However, her fiancée (Victim) lodged a case under Section 376 IPC against the petitioner alleging that he raped her on June 18, 2022.

The petitioner's counsel argued that subsequent to the engagement, the petitioner and the prosecutrix had voluntarily visited the hotel and their names have been reflected as guests in the records of the hotel.

It was further contended that the physical relations were developed with the consent of the prosecutrix. Even subsequent to the occurrence, the WhatsApp messages were exchanged which indicate that it was a consensual relationship and therefore, no case under 376 IPC is made out.

Court' observations 

At the outset, the Court observed that the WhatsApp messages sought to be relied upon by the petitioner were subsequent to the occurrence and that there was a lack of material to indicate that as on June 18, 2022 (the date of alleged occurrence), the prosecutrix had consented to any such relationship.

"The WhatsApp chat at a subsequent stage may have been exchanged on the score that the matrimonial alliance was existing at that point of time. However, it does not indicate that the act was committed by the petitioner with the consent of the prosecutrix. It is not borne out that at any point of time, the prosecutrix has voluntarily consented for the sexual intercourse and it is a case of a consensual relationship," the Court further remarked.

Against this backdrop, the Court also took into account the fact that as per information derived from the mother of the petitioner, there was reluctance on the part of the petitioner to solemnize marriage even at the point of time when a physical relationship was developed.

"There is a lack of material to indicate that there was genuine intention on the part of the petitioner to solemnize marriage and the prosecutrix was the consenting party at the relevant time. In the peculiar circumstances of the case, it is not made out that it was a case of a consensual relationship...there is a categoric statement of the prosecutrix that the petitioner entered into physical relationship with her, despite her reluctance, refusal, and denial. The passive submission on the part of the prosecutrix to the act, cannot be construed as a circumstance to hold that it was a case of consensual relationship" the Court remarked as it dismissed the anticipatory bail plea.

Case title - Sagar Kapoor v. State of Haryana [CRM-M-35393-2022 (O&M)]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 246

Click Here To Read/Download