Bombay HC: Renting accommodation for lover doesn’t show intent to marry

Mumbai: The Bombay high court on Friday stated that “The mere fact of renting various premises for the victim to reside in is not an indication of an intent to marry. In fact, it is otherwise. It demonstrates an intention of the Petitioner to keep the victim readily available for his pleasure.”

A bench of Justice Dr Neela Gokhale, and Justice A S Gokhale was hearing a plea for quashing an FIR by a Sewri resident accused of rape (Section 376, Indian Penal Code 1860), voluntarily causing hurt (Section 323, IPC), and criminal intimidation (Section 406, IPC) amongst other things.

The complainant, a divorced mother with a minor son, has accused a man of raping her after she refused to have sexual relations with him while she was pregnant with the accused’s child.

The complainant was acquainted with the accused and was residing in a room rented by him, on his assurances of marrying her. The accused would allegedly stay with her for about 2-3 days a week and continued to assure her of marriage. Later, the accused allegedly avoided this topic and assaulted her with fists and kicked her. Thereafter, the complainant refused to reside with the accused and shifted to her aunt’s house.

Subsequently, the accused apologised to the complainant and again confirmed his intention to marry her, acting on which the complainant relocated to another room rented by the accused and resumed their relationship. The complainant alleges that she became pregnant by the Petitioner and hence insisted that they should marry at the earliest. The complainant claims that the accused offered her money asking her to abort the child after refusing to marry her.

The complainant, who has now given birth to this child, states that during the pregnancy the accused would beat her and use filthy language. The accused, however, denies the paternity of the child and contends that the relationship between the parties was purely consensual.

The accused in his plea claimed that “The fact that the Petitioner hired accommodation for her indicated that he intended to marry her. However, he refused to marry her only when he learned that she had a son born out of her previous marriage with her husband.” The accused also sought the benefit of a lapse by the police due to their failure to submit a DNA report.

Based on a reading of the FIR and preliminary reading of the final report submitted by the police Justice Dr Neela Gokhale refused to quash the FIR and expressed unwillingness to dig further into any allegations regarding the offences.