The Bombay High Court has quashed an FIR and charge sheet filed against a US-based Indian citizen accused of rape on the pretext of marriage, calling the case an “abuse of the process.” The court also directed the withdrawal of a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against the petitioner. 

The case was lodged against the man on August 16, 2024 at Kapurbawadi Police Station, Thane, by a Canadian national of Indian origin, alleging that the accused forced himself on her at her Thane residence on November 24, 2022, after they met through the dating app “Bumble.” She claimed the act was committed under the false promise of marriage.

The petitioner, who has been settled in the USA for years, argued that the allegations were baseless. He contended that he and the complainant were in a consensual relationship and had met multiple times in Canada and the USA between January and October 2023. The complainant had also filed a sexual assault complaint in the US, but the Jersey City Police Department closed the case in March 2024, citing a lack of evidence.

Senior Advocate Manoj Mohite, representing the petitioner, pointed out inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements. He noted that her initial complaint to the Jersey City Police Department did not mention the alleged Thane incident. Additionally, her online complaint to the Thane police, filed in June 2024, vaguely referred to incidents occurring between December 2022 and February 2024, without specifically naming the alleged assault date.

The complainant’s counsel, Aadesh Konde-Deshmukh, argued that she had always sought a serious relationship and was misled into a sexual relationship by the petitioner’s false promises of marriage. He claimed that despite her hesitance due to the age difference, the petitioner repeatedly pursued her for marriage, only to later withdraw. Petitioner was 58 years old, and the complainant was 44 years old at the time of the alleged incident.

A bench of Justices MS Sonak and Jitendra Jain, however, found no evidence of false promises of marriage. It noted that the complainant was still legally married to her husband at the time of the alleged assault and obtained a divorce only in January 2024. The court emphasized that allegations of rape based on a false promise of marriage by a married woman must be evaluated with caution.

The court also observed that the complainant’s statements lacked essential details to establish an offence under Section 376 IPC. The FIR was filed nearly two years after the alleged incident, raising further doubts about its credibility.

“No case is made out to suggest that the Complainant gave her consent to be in a sexual relationship with the Petitioner for a considerable period based upon such alleged false promises of marriage,” the court noted. 

While quashing the FIR and directing withdrawal of LOC against the man, the court said: “In such circumstances, requiring the Petitioner to face prosecution for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC could amount to an abuse of the process.”