Bail granted in consensual relationship where major victim alleged rape on false promise of marriage.

The applicant filed his first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).

The prosecution alleged that the applicant entered a love relationship with the victim in 2024 via Instagram and, on March 23, 2025, established physical relations under the pretext of marriage.

It was further alleged that the applicant recorded a private video of the victim, uploaded it to her Instagram status using her credentials, and shared it with her brother.

The applicant contended that the relationship was consensual between two adults since 2023 and that he has been in custody since November 29, 2025.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail considering the nature of the allegations and the claims of a consensual relationship.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), regarding the grant of regular bail.

Sections 69 (sexual intercourse on deceitful means/promise to marry), 296 (obscene acts), and 351(3) (criminal intimidation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Sections 67 and 67(a) of the Information Technology Act (publishing/transmitting obscene material).

Procedural conduct requirements under Sections 84 (proclamation), 209 (non-appearance), 269 (punishment for non-attendance), and 351 (accused statement) of the BNS/BNSS framework.

The Court evaluated the gravity of the Offence against the applicant’s period of detention (since November 29, 2025) and the filing of the charge-sheet.

It observed that the victim is a major who had been acquainted with the applicant since 2023 through social media.

The Court noted the applicant's defense that the relationship was consensual and that the FIR was lodged only after the relationship failed to materialize in marriage.

Crucially, the Court weighed the fact that the investigation was complete (charge-sheet filed) and the applicant had no prior criminal antecedents.

Consequently, even though serious allegations regarding the unauthorized sharing of private videos were present, the Court found the applicant’s continued custody unnecessary for the trial.

The Court allowed the application and granted regular bail to the applicant upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties.

The holding is subject to strict conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear at all critical trial stages (framing of charges, Section 351 BNSS statement), and must comply with all procedural dates or face proceedings for abuse of liberty.