[Cites 12, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Sathish vs The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of ... on 15 April, 2026
Author: A.D.Jagadish Chandira
Bench: A.D.Jagadish Chandira
CRL.MP.No.5771 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
CRL.MP.No.5771 of 2026
in CRL.A.No.374 of 2026
Sathish
..Petitioner(s)
Vs.
The State rep. by,
The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Tiruvarur.
Cr.No.13/2021.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 430(2) of BNSS,
praying to suspend the execution of the sentence passed in Sessions Case No.65
of 2022 dated 04.03.2026 by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila
Court, Tiruvarur, against the petitioner/appellant and enlarge the petitioner on
bail, pending disposal of the above appeal.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Ajith Kumar
For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana,
Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
__________
Page1 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.MP.No.5771 of 2026
ORDER
This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking suspension
of sentence of imprisonment, imposed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track
Mahila Court, Tiruvarur in Sessions Case No.65 of 2022 vide judgment dated
04.03.2026 and to enlarge the petitioner/appellant on bail, pending disposal of
the Criminal Appeal.
2. The conviction and sentence imposed against the petitioner/appellant,
vide impugned judgment are as follows:-
Under Section Sentence
417 of IPC 1 year R.I. and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in
default, to undergo 1 month S.I.
493 of IPC 10 years R.I. and a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in
default, to undergo 4 months S.I.
376(2)(n) of IPC 14 years R.I. and a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in
default, to undergo 6 months S.I.
294(b) of IPC 3 months S.I. and a fine of Rs.500/-, in
default, to undergo 3 weeks S.I.
506(ii) of IPC 3 years R.I. and a fine of Rs.500/-, in
default, to undergo 4 weeks S.I.
The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
__________
Page2 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/appellant induced
P.W.1, the victim girl, into a physical relationship through a false promise of
marriage, committed rape and subsequently, reneged.
4. During the trial, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses and marked 7
documents. On the side of the defence, accused examined himself as D.W.1
and marked Ex.D1. When the petitioner/appellant was questioned under
Section 313 of Cr.P.C., he denied all incriminating circumstances.
5. After hearing the arguments of both sides, the Trial Court found the
petitioner/appellant guilty and convicted him as aforementioned. Aggrieved by
the said conviction and sentence, the petitioner/appellant has preferred the
present appeal along with a petition seeking suspension of sentence and his
enlargement on bail.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Trial Court
has grossly erred in convicting the petitioner/appellant without properly
appreciating the evidence on record. Admittedly, the marriage between the
__________
Page3 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
petitioner/appellant and P.W.1 was registered on 22.11.2024 at the office of the
Joint 1 Sub Registrar, Tiruvarur, and consequently, the charges levelled against
the petitioner/appellant are unsustainable. Even a perusal of P.W.1's testimony
reveals a long-standing consensual relationship between her and the
petitioner/appellant, which culminated in their marriage. In such circumstances,
the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not made out and the
conviction deserves to be set aside. Further, he submitted that there are
arguable points in the Criminal Appeal, which is unlikely to be taken up for
final hearing in the near future and that the petitioner/appellant has a fair chance
of succeeding in the appeal and hence, the sentence imposed on the
petitioner/appellant may be suspended and the petitioner/appellant may be
enlarged on bail.
7. In support of his contention, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner/appellant relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Mahes
Damu Khare vs. The State of Maharashtra & another reported in (2024) 11
SCC 398 for the proposition that the offences under Section 376 & 417 of IPC
cannot be made out in a case of prolonged consensual relationship subsequently
turning sour. The relevant paragraphs from the said judgment read thus:-
__________
Page4 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
“24. It may be also noted that there may be occasions
where a promise to marry was made initially but for
various reasons, a person may not be able to keep the
promise to marry. If such promise is not made from the
very beginning with the ulterior motive to deceive her, it
cannot be said to be a false promise to attract the penal
provisions of Section 375 IPC, punishable under Section
376 IPC.
25. In the present case, even assuming that the appellant
had made the promise since 2008 when they met for the
first time, the fact that they remained unmarried for a long
period till 2017 without there being any protest or
objection by the complainant, does not indicate the
intention at the initial stage itself to make the promise
falsely to marry the complainant. Making an allegation of
non-fulfilment of promise to marry without undue delay by
the promissee would, on the other hand, be an indicator of
a false promise being made from the initial stage. In the
present case, what is not in dispute is that the physical
relationship between the appellant and the complainant
continued for a long period of about a decade and as such
it is difficult to infer that the appellant had made a false
promise since the initial stage and continued to make false
promises to marry her on the basis of which she also
continued to have physical relationship with him.
26. In the present case, the nature of relationship
__________
Page5 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
between the appellant and the complainant can be
characterised by the following attributes:
(i) The appellant and the complainant were
acquainted with each other since 2008. The
complainant herself admits that the appellant has
been in physical relationship since then till 2017
without protest in spite of alleging that the appellant
had done so without her consent.
(ii) The physical relationship was going on
routinely. But the complainant in her complaint states
that after she got a rented room in Shirvane, Nerul
Sector 1, Navi Mumbai, in December, 2010, the
appellant used to come every day and had sexual
intercourse everyday, though without her consent and
by giving false promise of marriage.
(iii) The complainant does not appear to be a
naive and gullible woman who was susceptible to
deceit while maintaining physical relationship with
the appellant and the allegation of false promise
surfaced only when the appellant refused to provide
further financial and other assistance.
(iv) The conduct of the complainant clearly
shows that she is a mature person clearly capable of
understanding the consequences of her acts and she
was fully aware of the kind of illicit relationship she
was maintaining with a married person.
(v) The complainant was fully aware that the
appellant was already married and had two wives,
though one of them was not keeping well.
27. Thus, from the above it appears that it is more of an
extra-marital affair during the aforesaid period without
__________
Page6 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
any insistence by the complainant for getting married to the
appellant. The fact that the complainant continued to have
a physical relationship for a long time without any
insistence on marriage would indicate the unlikelihood of
any such promise made by the appellant for marrying her
and it rather indicates that the relationship was a
consensual one. In our opinion, the longer the duration of
the physical relationship between the partners without
protest and insistence by the female partner for marriage
would be indicative of a consensual relationship rather
than a relationship based on false promise of marriage by
the male partner and thus, based on misconception of fact.
28. Moreover, even if it is assumed that a false promise
of marriage was made to the complainant initially by the
appellant, even though no such cogent evidence has been
brought on record before us to that effect, the fact that the
relationship continued for nine long years, would render
the plea of the complainant that her consent for all these
years was under misconception of fact that the Appellant
would marry her implausible. Consequently, the criminal
liability attached to such false promise would be diluted
after such a long passage of time and in light of the fact
that no protest was registered by the complainant during
all those years. Such a prolonged continuation of physical
relationship without demurral or remonstration by the
female partner, in effect takes out the sting of criminal
__________
Page7 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
culpability and neutralises it.
29. It will be very difficult to assume that the
complainant who is otherwise a mature person with two
grown up children, was unable to discover the deceitful
behaviour of the appellant who continued to have sexual
relationship with her for such a long period on the promise
of marriage. Any such mendacious act of the appellant
would have been exposed sooner without having to wait for
nine years. The inference one can draw under the
circumstances is that there was no such false promise made
to the complainant by the appellant of marriage by
continuing to have physical relationship so as to bring this
act within the province of Section 376 IPC and therefore,
there was no vitiation of consent under misconception of
fact.
30. Further, it appears that discontinuance of financial
support to the complainant, rather than the alleged resiling
from the promise to marry by the appellant appears to be
the triggering point for making the allegation by the
complainant after a long consensual relationship for about
nine years.
31. In our view if criminality is to be attached to such
prolonged physical relationship at a very belated stage, it
can lead to serious consequences. It will open the scope for
imputing criminality to such long term relationships after
turning sour, as such an allegation can be made even at a
__________
Page8 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
belated stage to drag a person in the juggernaut of
stringent criminal process. There is always a danger of
attributing criminal intent to an otherwise disturbed civil
relationship of which the Court must also be mindful.
32. It is evident from the large number of cases decided
by this Court dealing with similar matters as discussed
above that there is a worrying trend that consensual
relationships going on for prolonged period, upon turning
sour, have been sought to be criminalised by invoking
criminal jurisprudence.”
(emphasis supplied)
8. The learned counsel further pointed out that the Hon’ble Supreme
Court echoed the same view in Prashant vs. State of NCT of Delhi reported in
(2025) 5 SCC 764. The relevant paragraphs from Prashant’s case, supra, are
as under:-
“17. In the present case, the issue that had to be
addressed by the High Court was whether, assuming all the
allegations in the FIR are correct as they stand, an offence
punishable under Sections 376 and 506 IPC were made
out. A bare perusal of the FIR reveals that the appellant
and the complainant first came in contact in the year 2017
and established a relationship thereafter. The parties met
multiple times at various places during the years 2017 and
__________
Page9 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2019, including at parks and their respective houses.
Although the complainant stated that the appellant had a
forceful sexual relationship with her, neither did she stop
meeting the appellant thereafter, nor did she file a criminal
complaint during the said period.
18. It is inconceivable that the complainant would
continue to meet the appellant or maintain a prolonged
association or physical relationship with him in the
absence of voluntary consent on her part. Moreover, it
would have been improbable for the appellant to ascertain
the complainant’s residential address, as mentioned in the
FIR unless such information had been voluntarily provided
by the complainant herself.
19…..
20. In our view, taking the allegations in the FIR and the
charge-sheet as they stand, the crucial ingredients of the
offence under Section 376(2)(n) IPC are absent. A review
of the FIR and the complainant’s statement under Section
164 CrPC discloses no indication that any promise of
marriage was extended at the outset of their relationship in
2017. Therefore, even if the prosecution’s case is accepted
at its face value, it cannot be concluded that the
complainant engaged in a sexual relationship with the
appellant solely on account of any assurance of marriage
from the appellant. The relationship between the parties
was cordial and also consensual in nature. A mere break
__________
Page10 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
up of a relationship. Between a consenting couple cannot
result in initiation of criminal proceedings. What was a
consensual relationship between the parties at the initial
stages cannot be given a colour of criminality when the
said relationship does not fructify into a marital
relationship. Further, both parties are now married to
someone else and have moved on in their respective lives.
Thus, in our view, the continuation of the prosecution in the
present case would amount to a gross abuse of the process
of law. Therefore, no purpose would be served by
continuing the prosecution.”
(emphasis supplied)
9. Further, in Prashant’s case, supra, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has
considered the view in X1 Vs. State of M.P. reported in (2024) 3 SCC 496 and
in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2019) 9
SCC 608. The relevant paragraph from Prashant’s case, supra, reads as under:-
“23. Recently this Court in X1 v. State of M.P. held that
when the relationship between the parties was purely
consensual and when the complainant was aware of the
consequences of her actions, the ingredients of the offence
of rape were not made out. Similarly, in Pramod
Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra arising out of
identical facts, this Court has enumerated the following
__________
Page11 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(SCC p. 620, para 18)
“18. To summarise the legal position that emerges
from the above cases, the “consent” of a woman
with respect to Section 375 must involve an active
and reasoned deliberation towards the proposed
act. To establish whether the “consent” was
vitiated by a “misconception of fact” arising out of
a promise to marry, two propositions must be
established. The promise of marriage must have
been a false promise, given in bad faith and with no
intention of being adhered to at the time it was
given. The false promise itself must be of immediate
relevance, or bear a direct nexus to the woman’s
decision to engage in the sexual act.””
(emphasis supplied)
10. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the prosecution has
established the case beyond reasonable doubt and the petitioner/appellant has
not made out any case for suspension of sentence and his subsequent release on
bail.
11. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant and the learned
Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused
the materials on record.
__________
Page12 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions
made by the learned counsel on either side and on considering the ratio laid
down in the aforementioned judgments of the Apex Court that a case of
prolonged consensual relationship subsequently turning sour, cannot attract the
offences under Sections 376 & 417 of IPC, this Court is inclined to grant the
relief of suspension of sentence imposed on the petitioner/appellant and the
petitioner/appellant is ordered to be released on bail.
13. Accordingly, till the disposal of the appeal, the substantive sentence
of imprisonment alone is suspended and the petitioner/appellant is ordered to be
released on bail, subject to the following conditions:-
i. The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/-
(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), with two sureties, each for a
like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast
Track Mahila Court, Tiruvarur.
ii. The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb
__________
Page13 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
impressions in the surety bonds and the Magistrate may obtain a
copy of their Aadhaar Cards or Bank Passbooks to ensure their
identities.
iii. The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on the first
working day of every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until
further orders.
14. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands ordered.
15-04-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Sni
__________
Page14 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Tiruvarur.
2.The Sessions Judge,
Fast Track Mahila Court,
Tiruvarur.
3.The Superintendent,
Central Prison,
Trichy.
4.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
__________
Page15 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
Sni
15-04-2026
__________
Page16 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
