Mumbai: Observing that “astrological incompatibility” can't be cited as a reason to backtrack from promise to marry the complainant with whom he had a relationship, the Bombay High Court has refused to discharge a 32-year-old man from charges of rape and cheating.
Justice SK Shinde rejected the application filed by one Avishek Mitra seeking discharge from the rape and cheating case filed against him at the Borivali police station by the women with whom he had a relation since 2012.
Dismissing his application, Justice SK Shinde observed, “It is apparent that the applicant in the guise of astrological incompatibility of the horoscopes, avoided the promise… Thus, I am convinced that the material on record suggests, it is a case of false promise to marry which apparently vitiates the complainant’s consent.”
Seeking Mitra’s discharge from the case, his counsel Raja Thakare argued that it was not a rape and cheating case. It was a case of breach of promise since he couldn’t marry the complainant due to astrological incompatibility.
The HC, however, refused to accept the arguments and observed that there was material to suggest that since the beginning the accused had no intention of keeping his promise to marry the complainant.
Justice Shinde also added that prima facie (on the face of it) Mitra assured the complainant that he marry her in order to make her withdraw the case against him.
According to the prosecution, since 2012, Mitra and the complainant worked together in a five-star hotel and were in a relationship. The woman alleged that the accused had indulged in physical relations with her on many occasions on the promise that they would get married.
She even alleged that Mitra forced her to abort her pregnancy once saying that they were still young.
The woman had first lodged a complaint in December 2012 after Mitra started avoiding her. The police had then called the accused and counselled the duo following which he told the police in January 2013 that he would marry her.
Additional public prosecutor Sharmila Kaushik, said that within 12 days of her withdrawing her complaint, Mitra backtracked on his promise to marry her.
Thakare argued that there was absolutely no intent on Mitra’s part not to marry the complainant or that his promise to marry her was false.
Disagreeing with the argument, the court observed: “Had his intentions been bonafide and true, the applicant would not have resiled from his promise to marry the complainant later,” while rejecting his plea for discharge.