The Bombay High Court has dismissed an FIR filed against a man accused of raping his wife, ruling that sexual relations within a legally registered marriage cannot be considered rape, even if religious marriage rituals were not performed.

Court: “Marriage Was Legally Valid, So Consent Cannot Be Denied”

A division bench of Justice Bharti Dangre and Justice Nivedita Mehta observed that although the husband didn’t fulfill his promise to solemnize the marriage through religious customs, the couple was already legally married under civil law, making the relationship valid under Indian law.

“Sexual relations within a legally recognized marriage do not amount to rape, even if religious ceremonies were not conducted,” the bench stated.

Background: Civil Marriage, Religious Dispute

The case involves a 26-year-old man who married the complainant in July 2022 under civil law. However, the woman later accused him of rape, alleging that he had misled her with a false promise to conduct a religious wedding. When he later filed for annulment of the marriage upon discovering her alleged prior relationship, she lodged the rape complaint.

Wife’s Allegation: “Sexual Exploitation on False Promise”

The wife claimed that since the religious rites were never performed, the marriage wasn’t valid, and thus, the sexual relationship should be treated as rape based on deceit. She accused her husband of using her emotionally and physically under false pretenses.

Court’s Verdict: No Case of Rape or Fraud

The High Court, however, found no legal merit in the rape charges. The judges held:

• A legally registered marriage under civil law confirms mutual consent for conjugal relations.
• A broken promise to perform religious rituals may amount to a breach of trust, but not to rape or fraud under the Indian Penal Code.
• The FIR and chargesheet, in this context, do not constitute a cognizable offence, and hence were quashed.

Key Takeaway: Legal Marriage Holds Ground Over Religious Rites

The ruling reinforces the notion that legal registration of marriage carries binding validity, regardless of religious ceremonies. The court emphasized that emotional grievances or unfulfilled religious customs do not override legal marital status in matters of sexual consent.