The North Goa Fast Track Special Court has discharged a 25-year-old resident of Bicholim who was accused of raping a woman by falsely promising marriage. In dismissing the charges, the court held that a prolonged, consensual relationship that later breaks down — including because of family opposition — does not constitute rape unless there is clear evidence that a deceitful promise was made from the outset.
According to police records, the relationship began in March 2018 and continued until April 2025. The prosecution alleged that during this period the accused entered into a physical relationship with the complainant on the pretext of marrying her, but later failed to fulfil his promise.
However, statements from the victim’s mother, father and brother indicated that both families were aware of the relationship and that the accused had expressed a genuine intention to marry. The marriage did not take place mainly because the accused’s father objected, citing personal and family issues.
In its order disposing of the discharge application, the Special Court referred to key legal precedents on consent and false promises of marriage. The court observed that, for an offence of rape to be made out in such cases, the physical relationship must be directly linked to a fraudulent promise made with an ulterior motive from the very beginning. Citing Supreme Court rulings, the court noted that “where a physical relationship is maintained for a prolonged period knowingly by the woman, it cannot be said with certainty that the relationship was purely because of the alleged promise made by the accused.”
The court further noted that the couple had been involved for nearly seven years and that the victim’s initial complaint contained only a vague assertion about false promises without detailing specific instances of deception. Finding no prima facie evidence of deceit or bad faith at the inception of the relationship, the court discharged the accused.
