The Supreme Courtroom on Monday orally remarked that earlier than marriage, a boy and a lady are strangers and therefore there must be circumspection earlier than indulging in pre-marital bodily relationship earlier than marriage. The Courtroom was listening to the bail plea of a person accused of rape on a false promise of marriage.
A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan was coping with the bail plea of a person who’s alleged to have lured the complainant by assuring her that he would marry her, despite the fact that he was already married and later married one other girl.
“Perhaps we’re outdated style however earlier than marriage a boy and a lady are strangers. No matter could be the thick and skinny of their relationship. We fail to know how they are often indulging in bodily relationship earlier than marriage. Perhaps we’re quaint…You have to be very cautious, no person ought to imagine anyone earlier than marriage”, Justice Nagarathna mentioned.
The prosecution case is that the complainant, aged about 30 years, met the petitioner on a matrimonial web site in 2022 and that he allegedly established bodily relations along with her on the promise of marriage on a number of events in Delhi and later in Dubai.
The complainant has claimed that on his insistence, she travelled to Dubai the place he allegedly established bodily relations along with her on the pretext of marriage and recorded intimate movies with out her consent, threatening to flow into them if she resisted. The complainant later learnt that he had married a second spouse on January 19, 2024 in Punjab.
Throughout the listening to of his bail plea, Justice Nagarathna questioned why the complainant travelled to Dubai to satisfy the petitioner. When the federal government counsel highlighted that the 2 met on a matrimonial web site and had been planning to marry, the choose noticed that if the girl was specific about marriage, she shouldn’t have travelled earlier than it.
Justice Nagarathna mentioned that these instances aren’t appropriate for trial and conviction and urged that the events be referred to mediation.
“She shouldn’t have gone earlier than marriage if she was so strict about it. We are going to ship them to mediation. These aren’t instances that are to be tried and convicted when there may be consensual relationship”, she mentioned.
The matter was stored on Wednesday to discover the potential for settlement.
Final 12 months, the Classes Courtroom and the Delhi Excessive Courtroom dismissed the petitioner’s bail functions. On November 18, 2025, the Excessive Courtroom rejected bail holding that the allegations prima facie point out that the promise of marriage was false from inception, notably as the petitioner was already married and had married once more on January 19, 2024. Counting on varied precedents, the Excessive Courtroom emphasised that consent obtained on a false promise of marriage could also be vitiated if the promise was made in unhealthy religion and with out intention to marry.
Thus, the petitioner filed the current SLP earlier than the Supreme Courtroom.
Case no. – SLP(Crl) No. 20842/2025
Case Title – Y Ok v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
