Breaking marital alliance not a criminal offence, holds Delhi court

The court acquitted a man accused of sexually harassing his prospective partner before ending their relationship

New Delhi

The court held that mere screenshots of the WhatsApp chat the woman had with the accused were not sufficient material to prove the case. (Getty Images/iStockphoto)

Refusal to marriage is not a criminal offence as a person cannot be forced to marry someone, a Delhi court held, while acquitting a man accused of sexually harassing his prospective partner before ending their relationship.

Judicial magistrate First Class (Mahila Court) Manya passed the judgment in a case lodged against a Delhi resident accused of sexual harassment by a woman, who was planning to marry him. The defendant was represented by advocate Pritthish Roy.

The complainant alleged that the man was only was interested in having a physical relationship with her and also engaged in sexual harassment. Later, the man also broke off the wedding plans, she alleged.

The court, while discharging the defendant in the case, held that it cannot pin the liability in the present case on the accused. “No person can be forced to marry someone, and in the present case, if the accused denied to marry the complainant, for whatever reasons or vice versa, then the communication took place between the two cannot be said to constitute a criminal offence”.

The woman submitted screenshots of WhatsApp conversations she had with the defendant, who reportedly tried to sexually induce her and made unwarranted physical advances. The woman also produced purchase receipts of jewellery, sarees and household items, in support of a marital alliance claim.

The court observed, “…the screenshots of the chats between the accused and the complainant does not show that the accused was doing or saying anything forcefully. He did try to test the water of the complainant, however, whenever she backed out, the accused never proceeded with the same conversation”.

The court further held that mere screenshots of the WhatsApp chat the woman had with the accused were not sufficient material to prove the case against the defendant, given that both the parties were in discussion and were assessing whether to go ahead with the marriage.

“Clearly, the complainant in the present case, seemed to have wilfully consented to the conversations with the accused, and nothing from the conversation appear to be forceful from the end of the accused,” the order read.

The court further observed that the failure on the part of the woman to submit her phone to the police for forensic examination and merely producing screenshots of the selective conversation cannot form the basis of her case and cautions the court from proceeding to frame charges against the accused.