Court emphasizes societal impact of exploitation under false pretenses, denies relief to accused citing grave nature of allegations.
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court, presided over by Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava, has denied anticipatory bail to Prashant Pal, the accused in a case involving allegations of sexual exploitation under the false pretense of marriage. The decision was delivered on November 4, 2025, in response to Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 8770 of 2025, arising from Case Crime No. 409 of 2025, registered at Auraiya Police Station, Auraiya District.
The court's decision hinged on the seriousness of the allegations, where the accused allegedly engaged in a prolonged relationship with the victim, promising marriage but lacking genuine intent to fulfill this promise. The court highlighted that such behavior constitutes a significant offense against societal norms.
The victim lodged an FIR after enduring both physical and mental exploitation, and upon learning of the accused's engagement to another individual. The prosecution argued that the accused maintained the relationship for five years under false pretenses and threatened the victim with obscene videos, further aggravating the situation.
The defense contended that the relationship was consensual and that no promise of marriage was made. However, the court, referencing Supreme Court precedents, underscored the distinction between a breach of promise and a false promise. It emphasized that the latter involves an intention not to fulfill the promise from the outset, vitiating the victim's consent under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code.
The judgment further noted the detrimental impact on the victim's life, stressing the need to curb such tendencies in society. The court, therefore, concluded that granting anticipatory bail would not be appropriate given the nature of the offense and the evidence presented.
Bottom Line:
Anticipatory bail cannot be granted in cases where the accused, from the inception of the relationship, had no intention to marry the victim and exploited her on the false pretext of marriage.
Statutory provision(s): Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 115(2), 351(2), 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Prashant Pal v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2827828
