MP HC acquits Katni trader in rape case:Says live-in relationship was consensual, and FIR is not justified

If two adult men and women live in a live-in relationship of their own free will and have consensual relations, but if the woman later files a complaint of rape after a dispute, it is not appropriate. Stating this, the MP High Court has granted relief to a Katni-based cloth merchant accused in a rape case. The court quashed the FIR registered against him at the police station and acquitted him, delivering its decision on March 17. The case involves Mukesh Thakurani, against whom a woman had filed a complaint alleging that he threatened to make a video viral and raped her at swordpoint. Friendship turned into close relationship Live-in turns bitter, case filed Rape allegations challenged in HC Despite willingly living in a live-in relationship, the woman filed a rape case against the cloth merchant, which he challenged in the High Court, calling all allegations baseless. Police investigation found no such video in Mukesh’s phone that could be used for blackmail, and no sword was recovered during the house search. Senior lawyer said relationship was consensual Senior Advocate Manish Dutt, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the relationship was consensual. He said the woman, a married individual living separately from her husband, was aware she could not remarry without a divorce, as stated in her Section 161 CrPC statement. He also pointed out that the cyber cell found no evidence of any obscene video, as reflected in the charge sheet. Therefore, the claim that she was trapped in the relationship on a false promise of marriage is not valid. Consensual relationship between married individuals Senior Advocate Manish Dutt told the court that the woman had reunited with her husband and filed a false FIR to protect her social image, calling all allegations against the petitioner baseless. It was highlighted that the physical relationship between two already married individuals lasted for about one and a half years, was consensual, and ended on its own after differences arose, which cannot be grounds for an FIR. Marriage promise claim baseless The court was informed that the allegation of a promise of marriage is unrealistic, as the woman was already married and had a child. Additionally, no concrete evidence was found to support allegations of threats or coercion under Section 506 of the IPC. Court found – Allegations not true, FIR quashed Senior Advocate Manish Dutt stated, Justice B.P. Sharma’s court found during the hearing that the allegations made against the petitioner are not true. If a woman lives with someone of her own free will and later files an FIR for rape against the same person, it is not appropriate. The court quashed the FIR registered against the petitioner and acquitted them.