In a notable case, the Supreme Court of India has granted interim bail to a man convicted of rape under the false promise of marriage after both he and the complainant agreed to marry. The decision, delivered on May 15, reflects a unique resolution facilitated by mutual consent between the parties involved.
The case was heard by a bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and SC Sharma. The petitioner had been convicted by a trial court under Sections 376(2)(n) (repeated rape) and 417 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). He was sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment for allegedly maintaining a long-term physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage. This conviction was later upheld by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which rejected his plea for suspension of the sentence.
Read Also:- Supreme Court to Hear Plea on NEET PG Marks Normalisation, Transparency Issues on May 20
Dissatisfied with the High Court's decision, the convict approached the Supreme Court seeking special leave to appeal. Given the sensitive nature of the case, the Supreme Court conducted in-camera proceedings (private hearing) involving both parties, their parents, and legal representatives.
During these discussions, the parties expressed their mutual willingness to marry, prompting the Court to adopt a reconciliatory approach. Noting the agreement, the Supreme Court suspended the petitioner’s sentence and granted him interim bail to facilitate the marriage.
"The petitioner and respondent No.2 have unequivocally stated before us that they are willing to marry each other. The details of their marriage shall be worked out by their respective parents, and we hope that the marriage takes place as expeditiously as possible."
Read Also:- Supreme Court Rejects Plea for Action Against BJP Minister Vijay Shah Over Remarks on Colonel Sofiya
Case Background
The case began with a First Information Report (FIR) lodged at the Women Police Station in Sagar, Madhya Pradesh. The complainant claimed that she had been in a relationship with the petitioner since 2016. She alleged that the petitioner engaged in sexual relations with her under a false promise of marriage, including a notarized affidavit in 2018 where he promised to marry her. However, he later refused, leading to the FIR.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the relationship was consensual, the complainant was an adult throughout, and her parents were declared hostile witnesses during the trial. The counsel also highlighted the petitioner’s qualifications as an MBBS graduate and argued that prolonged imprisonment could harm his career prospects.
Considering the mutual willingness of both parties to marry, the Supreme Court adopted a pragmatic approach, emphasizing restitution and closure instead of a strict legal determination. The Court directed the parents of both parties to arrange the marriage details “as expeditiously as possible.”
The case has been adjourned to July 25, 2025, and marked as part-heard, indicating that the Supreme Court will continue to monitor the matter.
Case No : SLP (Crl) 4951/2025
Appearance:
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Samant Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Singh, AOR
For Respondent(s): Ms. Mrinal Gopal Elker, AOR Mr. Chinmoy Chaitanya, Adv. Ms. Chhavi Khandelwal, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Trivedi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, AOR
