The Jammu & Kashmir High Court has rejected the anticipatory bail application of a man accused of sexually exploiting a woman by falsely promising marriage and maintaining a relationship over social media.
“It appears that the petitioner extracted sexual favours by giving false hope of marriage, which was never fulfilled,” the bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar stated.
The complainant alleged that the accused built trust through social media, developed a physical relationship, and misused the promise of marriage. She claimed the man even cohabited with her at his house in Gund Jaffar and Delhi, posing her as his wife.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Steps In to Protect 14-Year-Old Girl from Online Abuse Over 'Moonwalk' Movie Review
According to the FIR, she had also lent him ₹10 lakh to support his education. The relationship allegedly turned exploitative, culminating in a rape allegation during a visit in March 2025. The woman said that after she protested, the accused's family members allegedly assaulted and threatened her.
The court noted that digital evidence, including WhatsApp chats and phone records, supported the complainant’s claim that the accused repeatedly promised marriage.
“The WhatsApp chats show the petitioner assuring the complainant about marriage, while convincing her to continue the relationship,” the judge observed.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Directs Urgent Action for Compensation, Environmental Protection After Another Ship Mishap
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the FIR was a counterblast to a complaint he had earlier filed against the woman for alleged extortion of ₹17 lakhs. However, the court said that the timing and sequence of events suggested otherwise.
“It appears that the complaint filed by petitioner No.1 was a reaction after the woman confronted him over the broken promise of marriage,” the Court said.
The accused had also contended that merely failing to marry due to circumstances does not constitute an offence under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The court, however, held that at the current stage, there was prima facie material to support the FIR.
The court refused anticipatory bail on the grounds that it would adversely affect the investigation.
“Granting bail at this stage would not only hinder collection of crucial electronic evidence but also discourage victims of such offences,” it remarked.
The High Court emphasized that anticipatory bail is not a right in cases involving serious offences like rape and cheating on false promises. It also stated that digital devices of the accused need to be seized for forensic analysis, which could be compromised if bail is granted.
Read Also:- Law Student Urges Kerala High Court to Enforce Animal Birth Control Rules After Stray Dog Bite Incident
“There is every likelihood that if granted bail, the petitioner may tamper with the evidence or destroy digital proof,” the court noted.
Meanwhile, the court quashed the FIR against the accused’s brothers, stating that there was no material to suggest their involvement or knowledge of the alleged sexual acts between the main accused and the complainant.
“There is nothing in the FIR that indicates petitioners No.2 and 3 were privy to the alleged acts. Continuing proceedings against them would be an abuse of process,” the Court held.
Case-Title: SHAKIR-UL-HASSAN & ORS. Vs UT OF J&K & another, 2025
