Mumbai: The sessions court last weel granted anticipatory bail to a 46-year-old man booked on the complaint of rape by his 30-year-old former live in partner. The court while granting him relief held that the two were in consensual relationship.
As per the case registered with Colaba police station, the complainant came into contact with the accused on October 6, 2023. The complainant was divorcee and the accused proposed her for marriage. She initially refused to have any physical relations, however, on his promise to marry the complainant allowed the physical relationship.
Thereafter, the complainant came to know about relationship of accused with another lady. She has alleged that in spite of it, the accused committed forcible physical relation with her at his residence.
It is alleged that thereafter, the accused informed her that he has her obscene videos with him and insisted for further relations on the strength of such videos. The complainant became pregnant, however accused had given some pills to her for abortion. Thereafter, she also came to know that the accused is staying with his wife. It is alleged that his first marriage is in subsistence and still he committed rape on her repeatedly under promise to marry her. Hence, the complaint on August 23, 2024.
Fearing arrest the man sought anticipatory bail and cited an agreement wherein he claimed that, are in live-in-relationship for last 11 months as per the MOU executed by them. That it is a consensual relation maintained by them and therefore, any offence of rape is not prima-facie made out.
The court however discarded the said MOU observing that, "they have entered into contractual live-in-relationship for 11 months from August 01, 2024 to June 30, 2025 whereas the offence is registered on August 23, 2024. The victim has denied her signature on such MOU. The document of MOU placed on record is merely a xerox copy with stamp of Notary. However, it is the part of defence of the accused about nature of relationship between the parties. There is nothing at this stage to ascertain authenticity of such MOU."
The court however, said that "the consensual relation between two adults which subsequently developed into spoil relations leading to the complaint. The allegations about any obscene videos of complainant are not specific." Hence the court said, the custodial interrogation of the accused is not required.
