Courts Should Not Draw Conclusions At Stage Of Bail About Promise Of Marriage, Such Finding Must Await Evaluation Of Evidence At Trial: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court on Thursday observed that it is neither appropriate nor feasible for courts to draw any conclusion or return any finding at the stage of bail of an accused as to whether a promise of marriage made to a prosecutrix was false or in bad faith.

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani added that such a a finding or decision must await a “thorough assessment and evaluation of evidence” to be led by the parties at the trial.

“This is also not the stage when the court must, or even can, finally decide if the purported false promise of marriage was of immediate relevance, or bore a direct nexus, to the prosecutrix's decision to engage in the sexual act,” the court said.

The court made the observations while granting bail to a 20-years-old in a rape case registered in 2021 under sections 376 and 377 of Indian Penal Code. He was in judicial custody for about one year and seven months

Chargesheet was filed on December 10, 2021, and charges were framed against the accused under section 376 of IPC. He was discharged for the offence under section 377.

It was the accused’s case that he and the prosecutrix, both majors, were classmates and were in a relationship for two years and that the case was filed against him since a proposal for their marriage went awry.

It was also contended that there were no allegations of any physical assault during the alleged incidents and that there was no evidence against him apart from the oral testimony of the prosecutrix.

On the other hand, the prosecution opposed the grant of bail and submitted that the prosecutrix was consistent in her allegations and supported her statement recorded under section 164 of Cr.P.C before the concerned Magistrate.

It was also submitted that the guilt of the accused was evident from certain WhatsApp chats between him and his friend wherein he allegedly confessed to having committed the act.

While granting bail to the accused, Justice Bhambhani noted that it was admitted that both the parties in question were major at the time of the alleged incidents and were in a “romantic relationship” which was known to their families.

“…in the present case there appears to be no cavil that the parents of the petitioner as well as the prosecutrix were contemplating marriage between the two. It appears that the proposed marriage was awaiting the two of them completing their education. At this stage therefore, it can hardly be said with any conviction that the purported promise of marriage made by the petitioner to the prosecutrix was ex-facie false; and that it had been made in bad faith, with no intention of being adhered to when it was given,” the court said.

It added: “Considering the admittedly ongoing romantic relationship between the two, it also cannot be said with any certitude that the purported promise of marriage bore immediate relevance or direct nexus to the prosecutrix‟s decision to engage in the sexual act with the petitioner.”

Title: RR v. THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 476

Click Here To Read Order