The case involved a woman filing a complaint in Nagpur, alleging rape by her partner after learning he was engaged to another woman. The accused, summoned by the police, explained that he was willing to marry the complainant, but his parents objected. The FIR was filed under IPC Section 376(2)(n), prompting the accused to seek discharge from the Sessions Court, which was denied. Subsequently, he approached the High Court to quash the proceedings.

Advocate JM Gandhi argued that the relationship was consensual and based on a love affair. He presented WhatsApp messages indicating the victim’s initial reluctance for marriage. Gandhi contended that the complainant fabricated charges when the accused secured a new job and got engaged. Justice Chandwani concurred, stating, “Merely because the accused resiled from his promise to marry, since his parents were not agreeable to their marriage, it cannot be said that the applicant committed the offence punishable under Section 375 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).”

The High Court emphasized that the physical relationship wasn’t solely based on the promise of marriage, as the couple engaged in consensual relations over an extended period. The judgment concluded that the accused shouldn’t face charges, discharging him from the case and disposing of his petition.

View all stories

The Unsealed Epstein Files: Truth, Power, and the Names That Shook the World

The “Mother of All Deals”: India & EU negotiate.

The Shockwave: America Captures Maduro

Vrajank Royal Kings Crowned Unbeaten Champions of Legacy Premier League 2025

How 2026 Became the Year of Plastic-Free Packaging

The post Breaking marriage promise due to parental ‘no’ does not amount to rape: High Court appeared first on FIRSTRAY NEWS.

Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, while partially allowing Sanjeev Gupta’s revision petition, emphasized that the proposed Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, intended to replace the IPC, lacks a provision similar to section 377. The court highlighted that, according to medical evidence, there was no support for the allegations of committing an unnatural offense. Consequently, the court acquitted the accused of the section 377 charge but upheld his conviction and sentence under sections 498A (harassment for dowry) and 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) of the IPC.

The case originated from a 2013 FIR filed against Sanjeev Gupta by his wife under various sections of the IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. Despite convictions by the trial and appellate courts for charges under sections 323 and 498-A, the accused sought revision before the high court.

While affirming the guilt findings for charges under sections 323 and 498-A, the court maintained that marital rape is not currently criminalized in the country. It acknowledged that certain petitions were pending before the Supreme Court seeking the criminalization of marital rape. Until a decision is reached on those petitions, the court concluded that there is no criminal penalty for marital rape when the wife is 18 years of age or older.

The post Marital rape ‘no crime’ if the wife is 18 or above: Allahabad HC appeared first on FIRSTRAY NEWS.