5 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Jul 22, 2026 10:04 AM IST
The Uttarakhand High Court recently dismissed a rape case against a man accused of establishing a physical relationship on the false promise of marriage, holding that a consensual relationship that later fails to culminate in marriage cannot, by itself, amount to rape.
Justice Siddhartha Sah, noting that the estranged couple met through the Tinder app, remained in a voluntary relationship for a considerable period, and that the woman was a “consenting” adult, observed that criminal law cannot be invoked merely because a relationship turns “sour”.
“It is clear that the respondent number 2 (woman) was a mature person who, out of her own free will and accord, entered into a physical relationship with the applicant (petitioner). If subsequently, the relationship turns sour and does not culminate in marriage, that by itself cannot be a ground to term the relationship between the parties as one involving physical relationship on the false pretext of marriage,” the July 16 order read.
Tinder, affair and FIR
The woman claimed that she came into contact with the man through the dating app Tinder and became close friends with him in August 2019, following which they started speaking over the phone. During the course of their friendship, the man later allegedly came to visit her, and they later travelled together to a nearby city.
It was further alleged in the FIR that the following day, when the woman was drunk, the man established physical relations with her despite assuring her that he would not commit any wrong.
Justice Siddhartha Sah noted that the relationship between the petitioner and the woman continued for a “considerable period of time”.
She added that the man assured her that he would marry her and thereafter frequently visited her, and they continued to have a physical relationship. However, the woman stated that during the COVID-19 lockdown and thereafter, the man started to neglect her and refused to marry her, citing his father’s ill health.
The woman claimed that she also contacted the man’s family, but they did not help her. She further alleged that through Instagram, she came to know that he had gotten engaged.
Story continues below this ad
She filed the FIR alleging that the man established physical relations with her on the false pretext of marriage and was now planning to marry someone else
‘No case of false pretext of marriage’
Noting that the relationship between the petitioner and the woman continued for a “considerable period of time”, and they were frequently meeting, with the man visiting her all the way from a distant city, the high court held that it is clear that the matter does not appear to be a case of entering into a physical relationship by the man with the woman on the false pretext of marriage.
“Accordingly, in such circumstances, the further continuation of the proceedings under Section 376 of the IPC against the applicant would amount to an abuse of process of law,” the court added.
Met through Tinder app, not matrimonial website
Appearing for the man, advocate Pankaj Kumar Sharma argued that the said FIR shows that the woman came in contact with his client through a social website named ‘Tinder app’, which is not a matrimonial site, but is a popular site among youngsters, and the said website is meant for making friends.
Story continues below this ad
Sharma added that from the very first date of contact of the woman with the man through the said Tinder app, it was mutual understanding that there would be no compulsion of marriage in the starting relationship, and both of them, on their consent, made relations with each other.
He argued that it is vague and misleading to allege that the man, on the pretext of marriage, has developed physical relations.
He added that since the very basis of the contact between the petitioner and the woman was a mobile app which is specifically meant for youngsters to make relations and friendship with the person of their choice, it is not the case that the woman contacted him for marriage, as the said site is not a matrimonial website.
Not denying meeting through Tinder app
Legal aid counsel Rajendra Arya representing the woman submitted that they do not deny that the estranged couple met each other through the Tinder app and that the first incident of physical relationship between them was made under the influence of liquor.
Story continues below this ad
It was added that the relations were made by the man with the woman under the false pretext of marriage, and therefore, the offence under Section 376 of the IPC (punishment for rape) gets attracted.
Justice Siddhartha Sah noted that the relationship between the petitioner and the woman continued for a “considerable period of time”.