-
The court made it clear that the appellant must not misuse the relief granted
-
He has been directed not to influence witnesses or tamper with evidence and to cooperate fully with investigators
-
Given his overseas residence, authorities have been instructed to inform him of investigation dates well in advance
PRAVASISAMWAD.COM
The Supreme Court has granted anticipatory bail to a London-based non-resident Indian (NRI) accused of raping a Mumbai-based advocate on the alleged false promise of marriage, overturning an earlier order of the Bombay High Court that had denied him relief.
A Bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan allowed the appeal filed by the NRI information technology professional and set aside the Bombay High Court’s October 15, 2025 order rejecting his anticipatory bail plea. The apex court held that the appellant was entitled to protection under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, subject to strict conditions.
The court noted that the appellant is currently residing in London and directed that he must fully cooperate with the investigation whenever he returns to India. “In the event the appellant returns to India for the purpose of cooperating with the investigation or for any other purpose, this order shall protect him insofar as the present offences alleged against him,” the bench observed in its order dated January 8.
The case stems from a complaint filed by a practising advocate from Mumbai, who alleged that the appellant had sexually exploited her on the false promise of marriage while she was assisting him during his divorce proceedings
Based on her complaint, a case was registered under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including Section 69 relating to sexual intercourse induced by deceitful means or a false promise of marriage, along with charges of cheating, criminal breach of trust, and common intention. Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2000, relating to violation of privacy, was also invoked.
After apprehending arrest, the appellant approached the Bombay High Court, which rejected his plea, prompting him to move the Supreme Court. The apex court had earlier granted him interim protection and restrained authorities from taking coercive action, including arrest.
Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court directed that in the event of arrest, the appellant be released on bail upon furnishing a cash security of ₹25,000 with two sureties. It also ordered that coercive measures such as the look-out circular, blue corner notice, and proclamation proceedings be kept in abeyance.
