Mumbai Court Grants Bail to Siddesh Sunil Khot Accused of Rape and Cheating, Citing Consensual Relations and Ongoing Dispute

Mumbai, Maharashtra – On April 4, 2022, the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai granted bail to Mr. Siddesh Sunil Khot, who was accused of offenses under Sections 376 (rape), 420 (cheating), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The bail application, bearing No. 654 of 2022, was heard by Additional Sessions Judge Sonali P. Agarwal (C.R. No. 41) in connection with Crime No. 874 of 2021 registered with Dadar Police Station.

Background of Allegations

The prosecution’s case, presented by APP Mrs. Meera Choudhary-Bhosale, alleged that the informant and the applicant became friends on Facebook. In 2017, their families discussed marriage, and an engagement ceremony took place in June 2018. The informant claimed that in August 2018, the applicant initiated sexual relations by promising marriage. Similar incidents allegedly occurred in June and December 2019.

The informant further alleged that in October 2020, the applicant abruptly stopped communicating with her and blocked her on social media. She later discovered that he had married another woman on November 27, 2020. Despite this, the applicant allegedly re-established contact in December 2020, making frequent video calls and messages. The crucial turning point, as per the prosecution, occurred on November 2, 2021, when the applicant allegedly threatened to viral her nude photos if she refused to meet him, leading to the lodging of the FIR.

Applicant’s Defense

Represented by Advocate Mr. Vineet B. Redekar, the applicant, Mr. Siddesh Sunil Khot, presented a counter-narrative. He contended that:

Their engagement took place on June 17, 2018.
The sexual relations were consensual, and the informant herself insisted on them, believing it would solidify their marriage.
The marriage was called off because the applicant discovered the informant was having an affair with one Mr. Yash Ahire. He claimed that Mr. Ahire himself showed him photos and videos, and a confrontation with the informant’s family revealed their knowledge of her relationship with Mr. Ahire. This led to a police complaint (NC No. 802 of 2019) by Mr. Ahire against the informant’s father and uncle for abuse.
The applicant claimed the informant continuously contacted him, apologized for cheating, and sought to remain friends.
He also highlighted that the informant had filed an FIR (No. 67 of 2021) against Mr. Yash Ahire, accusing him of being the reason for her broken marriage and threatening him with a similar false case if he testified against her.
The applicant denied possessing any obscene photos of the informant.
He stated that the informant was aware of his impending marriage to another girl and even congratulated him on Instagram after his wedding.
The applicant suggested the FIR was lodged out of revenge after the informant learned of his wife’s pregnancy.
He asserted his initial intention to marry the informant and that he lost a good job due to the false allegations.
Finally, he pleaded for bail, citing his status as the sole earning member with a new-born baby, and pointed out the informant’s refusal to submit her mobile phone for police examination.

Court’s Deliberations and Decision

The court noted that while the prosecution alleged rape based on a false promise of marriage, the applicant claimed the relationship ended due to the informant’s infidelity. The court acknowledged that the marriage between the applicant and informant was indeed broken, and the applicant subsequently married another person. The core issue, according to the court, was whether the sexual relations were a result of a false promise or a consensual act in the context of a relationship that later soured.

Judge Agarwal referenced two key Bombay High Court orders:

In Mahesh Balkrishna Dandane vs. The State of Maharashtra (Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 27 of 2014, decided on March 12, 2014), it was held that “every breach of promise to marry cannot be said to be either a cheating or rape.” The court emphasized that relationships evolve, and a breakup, though unfortunate, doesn’t automatically transform consensual physical contacts into rape.
Similarly, in Mr. Tejas Udaykumar Sarvaiya Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Anticipatory Bail Application No. 105 of 2016, decided on April 7, 2016), the High Court observed that an adult woman’s decision to have a sexual relationship should be considered voluntary and conscious, and the frustration of a breakup should not be converted into an offense of rape.

Applying these precedents, the court found it to be a matter of trial to determine the true nature of the relationship’s termination. Given that the mobile and laptop of the accused had been seized and the charge-sheet filed, the court determined that no further purpose would be served by keeping the accused in judicial custody. The court also noted the absence of any criminal antecedents against the applicant.

Bail Conditions

Accordingly, the court allowed the bail application, ordering the release of Mr. Siddesh Sunil Khot on furnishing a personal bond and surety bond of Rs. 15,000/-. The bail was granted with the following conditions:

The accused is directed not to threaten or cause injury to the informant.
The accused is directed not to tamper with prosecution evidence.
The accused is directed not to circulate or upload any photos of the informant in any manner till the disposal of the case.
The accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer.
The accused shall furnish his mobile number, phone number, and all addresses (permanent, temporary, and postal) to the Investigating Officer and inform of any changes until the conclusion of the trial.

The Criminal Bail Application No. 654 of 2022 was disposed of accordingly.