Delhi High Court: Why Roka ceremony helped this Army man get anticipatory bail in rape case

Sections 376(2)(n) of the IPC states that whoever commits rape repeatedly on the same woman, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 506 of the IPC defines the punishment for criminal intimidation.

Allegations

• The prosecution had alleged that the accused who was employed in the Army had come into contact with the woman in 2021 through Instagram.
• It was further alleged that the accused visited the woman’s house, met her family members, and expressed his desire to marry her.
• In 2023, when the woman was alone at her house, the petitioner allegedly came to her house, and on the false promise of marriage, established physical relations with her.
• The woman alleged that the accused recorded explicit pictures and videos of the prosecutrix in his mobile phone, without her knowledge.
• It was alleged that the accused and his sister demanded Rs 10 lakh as dowry for solemnisation of the marriage.
• Following the complaint by the woman, an FIR was registered against the accused and it was stated that the accused did not join the investigation, despite notices being pasted at his house.

Arguments

• The counsel appearing for the accused submitted that the FIR showed that the parties were in a relationship for a long period during which the parties performed a “roka”/engagement ceremony, which proved that there was no false promise of marriage.
• It was argued that the case of a sour relationship which does not make out the offence of rape.
• On the other hand, additional public prosecutor submitted that although the relationship between the parties lasted more than four-five years, the allegations established that physical relations were made only upon a promise of marriage.
• It was argued that the accused even performed ceremonial rites such as the “roka”/engagement ceremony to deceive the prosecutrix into believing his assurances.
• It was contended that the accused repeatedly took the prosecutrix to hotels and presented different fake identification documents. It was submitted that the prosecutrix has reiterated her allegations in a statement recorded before the magistrate’s court under Section 183 of BNSS, which was sufficient to establish a prima facie case.

Delhi High Court’s observations

• The prosecutrix claims to have been acquainted with the petitioner since the year 2021.
• The FIR was registered in 2025. While delay in registration of the FIR may not by itself be conclusive, particularly in the case of allegations of sexual offences, what is significant in the present case is that the prosecutrix had, in the interregnum, made a prior complaint to the police, which did not include any such allegation.
• The very first statement in the complaint is that the prosecutrix was in love with the petitioner.
• This aligns with the possibility that a physical relationship may be made without a promise of marriage, as indicated in the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mahesh Damu Khare v State of Maharashtra.
• While these matters are ultimately to be adjudicated at trial, having regard to the prime facie case, and the fact that the petitioner has no prior criminal antecedents, it is appropriate to protect him from deprivation of his liberty.