High Court’s Decision: Cohabitation With Deception About First Marriage Amounts to Rape
The Telangana High Court ruled that a man who engages in cohabitation with deception with a woman by lying to her about his first marriage is guilty of rape. The division bench of Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and BR Madhusudhan Rao stated that if a man is already married, any subsequent marriage is void under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. If he knowingly misleads a woman into believing she is his lawful wife and engages in physical relations, he is guilty under Sections 375 and 376 of the IPC and Sections 63 and 64 of the BNS.
Case Background
The appellant sought annulment of her marriage and demanded ₹1 crore as alimony. She argued that her husband had not legally divorced his first wife before marrying her. The Sessions Court had dismissed her plea, stating she was aware of his first marriage and had not provided proof of his financial status.
The couple married on March 8, 2018, at Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple, Yadagirigutta, following Hindu customs. The appellant accused her husband of controlling behavior, accessing her private communications, and misusing her salary. The primary issue was his false claim of divorce from his first wife.
Customary Divorce Not Proven
The respondent claimed he had divorced his first wife according to family customs. However, he failed to provide any evidence, either documentary or oral, to support this claim. Despite court orders, he did not appear or submit proof. The trial court had an obligation to examine whether customary divorce existed and whether it was legally valid.
Court Finds Rape Charges Applicable
The High Court ruled that since the respondent married the appellant while his first wife was alive, he misled her into believing their marriage was legal. Section 375 of the IPC and Section 63(d)(iv) of the BNS cover situations where a woman consents to sexual relations based on a mistaken belief of marriage. The court held that the respondent’s actions fell under this category.
Trial Court’s Errors
The High Court criticized the Family Court for assuming the appellant knew about the first marriage. It noted that the respondent himself had called their marriage an “arranged marriage,” contradicting the trial court’s claim of a “love-cum-arranged” marriage.
The trial court unfairly blamed the appellant for not investigating her husband’s past. It also made irrelevant remarks about her “luxurious life” and financial dependence on him. The High Court found these observations baseless and inappropriate.
Final Verdict
The High Court set aside the trial court’s decision and allowed the appeal. The ruling emphasized that a man cannot use deception to establish a marital relationship and that such deceitful cohabitation amounts to rape.
