"Defence counsel rightly argued that IPC does not recognise any such concept of martial rape. If complainant was a legally-wedded wife of accused, the sexual intercourse with her by accused would not constitute offence of rape even if it was by force or against her wishes," the court said.
The court remanded the case back to a magisterial court as rest of the alleged offences, including those of causing hurt, criminal intimidation and theft, for which the accused was charge-sheeted, were triable by a magistrate.
The case was committed to the district judge after the charge sheet was filed by the police as the offence of rape was tried by sessions court.
The woman had filed the case in 2007 alleging that after her first husband's death, accused Saeed started visiting her and by expressing sympathy, he asked her to marry him.
She had told the court that she married Saeed in February 2006, but later she came to know that the accused had married her only to grab her property which was then sold by him and his four sons.
The police had said in its charge sheet that Saeed had maintained physical relations with the complainant after their marriage and it could be a possibility that those physical relations were against her consent and wish.