The Allahabad High Court ruled that refusal to marry after four years of a consensual live-in relationship does not constitute a cognizable offence, clarifying the law on promise of marriage and rape.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court held that a man’s refusal to marry his partner after a consensual live-in relationship of four years does not amount to a cognisable offence, including rape.
The judgment came on a plea filed by a woman challenging an August 17, 2024, order of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahoba, which had dismissed her complaint against her live-in partner.
Court’s Observations
Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal observed that when two “able-minded adults” choose to cohabit as a live-in couple for several years, it is presumed that they voluntarily entered into such a relationship with full awareness of its consequences.
The court further clarified:
“In our view, if two able-minded adults reside together as a live-in couple for more than a couple of years and cohabit with each other, a presumption would arise that they voluntarily chose that kind of a relationship fully aware of its consequences.”
The bench held that the allegation of a promise of marriage, in such circumstances, is “unworthy of acceptance” unless there is a clear assertion that the physical relationship would not have occurred without such a promise.
Submissions by the Counsel
The man’s counsel, Sunil Choudhary, argued that both parties had been in a relationship, were initially willing to marry, but later disagreements led to the withdrawal of the marriage decision. The woman had approached the SDM and departmental officers with her grievance, but later both parties amicably settled their dispute.
The relationship was also acknowledged by colleagues and officials at their workplace (Tehsil), indicating that the cohabitation was consensual and known publicly.
Also Read: ‘Bundle of Lies’: Supreme Court Quashes Rape FIR Filed on False Promise of Marriage
Court’s Decision
The High Court concluded that the case did not disclose any cognisable offence against the man. It emphasized that consensual long-term live-in relationships, even if they end without marriage, cannot automatically be treated as rape merely on the grounds of a failed promise to marry.
Appearance:
Counsel for Revisionist: Bhaskar Bhadra, Rajveer Chaurasiya
Counsel for Opposite Party: G.A., Sunil Choudhary
Case Title:
Km Neha @ Neha Anuragi Versus State of U.P. and Another
CRIMINAL REVISION No. – 4743 of 2024
Read Order:
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Extramarital Affair
