TIP Essential When Identity Based On Belated 'Alias' Claims; Conviction Can't Rest On Improved Witness Testimonies: Supreme Court Conviction Based On Flawed Identification Cannot Be Sustained In Law: Supreme Court Acquits Sri Lankan National In UAPA Case Penalty For Misdeclaration Of Power Capacity Is Strict Liability; No Need To Prove Intent Or 'Gaming': Supreme Court Authority To Appoint Includes Power To Dismiss; Visitor Can Terminate 'First Registrar' Under Transitional Provisions: Supreme Court State Cannot Use Delay Or Contractual Clauses To Deny Statutory Compensation For Land Acquisition: Supreme Court State As Model Employer Cannot Deny Regularization Benefits To Workers Due To Its Own Clerical Lapses: Supreme Court Section 106 Evidence Act | Husband’s Failure To Explain Wife’s Unnatural Death In Matrimonial Home Completes Chain Of Circumstances: Supreme Court Tender Condition For Out-Of-State Bidders To Submit EMD Via Demand Draft Not Mandatory If Clause Uses 'May': Supreme Court Affidavit Is Not 'Evidence' Under Section 3 Of Evidence Act Unless Court Orders Its Use Under Order XIX CPC: Supreme Court Exclusion Of Natural Heirs Not A 'Suspicious Circumstance' To Invalidate Will If Testator Provides Reason: Supreme Court 18-Year-Old Rendered 100% Disabled Entitled To Compensation For Loss Of Marriage Prospects And Dignity: Punjab & Haryana HC Right To Life Under Article 21 Prioritizes Preservation Of Mother's Life Over Reproductive Autonomy If Termination Poses Fatal Risk: J&K High Court Director’s Involvement In Company Affairs A Disputed Fact; High Court Cannot Conduct ‘Mini-Trial’ To Quash Section 138 NI Act Complaint: Punjab & Haryana HC Abuse Of Process: Bombay High Court Quashes FIRs Against Lawyer & Ex-Police Chief Sanjay Pandey; Says Complaints Motivated By Vengeance Magistrate Not Bound To Order FIR In Every Case Under Section 175(3) BNSS If Complainant Possesses All Evidence: Allahabad High Court High Court Can Initiate Suo Motu Inquiry Against Judicial Officers Based On Information; Sworn Affidavit Not Mandatory: Gujarat High Court Lack Of Videography, Independent Witnesses During Contraband Seizure Relevant Factors For Granting Bail Under NDPS Act: Delhi High Court

Anticipatory Bail: Consent in a Subsisting Marriage Cannot be Considered False Promise of Marriage: Kerala High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a pivotal decision, the Kerala High Court granted anticipatory bail to a 22-year-old man accused under various Sections of the Indian Penal Code including 354, 376, and 506. The Honourable Mr. Justice Gopinath P., while rendering the judgment, made an important observation: “when one of the parties is in a subsisting marriage, it could not be said that consent for sexual relationship was obtained on the false promise of marriage.”

The case involved Shiva Moorthy, a 22-year-old student, who was accused of committing various offences against a woman under the pretext of a false promise of marriage. The petitioner argued that the allegations were false and emphasized his young age and the victim’s existing marital status as grounds for his innocence.

Represented by a team of advocates, including Vijay Sankar V.H. and Saqib Rizwan, the defense pointed to the victim’s marital history, stating that she had induced the young man into a relationship. The Public Prosecutor, however, argued that the woman, aged 34, was compelled into a sexual relationship by the petitioner on the promise of marriage.

Justice Gopinath, in his decision, cited the previous judgment of the same court in the case of Tino Thankachan V. State of Kerala, reiterating that “when one of the parties is in a subsisting marriage, it could not be said that consent for sexual relationship was obtained on the false promise of marriage.”

As a result, the Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to strict conditions that include a bond of Rs. 50,000 and appearing before the investigating officer on specified dates.

This ruling brings into focus the complex issues surrounding consent and marital status, particularly when charges of false promises are involved. Legal experts believe that this case sets a precedent that may influence future cases involving similar circumstances.

Date of Decision: 30 October 2023

SHIVA MOORTHY  VS STATE OF KERALA

Latest Legal News