"False excuses to pretend to be married," the Supreme Court said about the acidity in relationships - 'every relationship formed by consent ...' - false pretense of marriage at the acquisition of relationships that Superame Court said

The SC made an important remark, saying that every relationship with permission in which the possibility of marriage could probably be in the case of controversy cannot get the color of false excuses to give the marriage. The court said the tendency to submit criminal cases because of acidity in the relationship. This remark was made by rejecting an order of the Calcutta High Court. Pti, New -Delhi. The Supreme Court said on Monday that every relationship with permission, which probably could probably not get the color of false excuses to pretend to be married in a dispute state. At the same time, he said that the tendency to submit criminal matters increases due to acidity in relationships. Justice BV A Bank of Nagaratna and Saatha Chandra Sharma rejected an order from the Calcutta High Court in which he refused to release the former judicial officer in a FIR filed in 2015 for the alleged rape crime. Know that the entire case in the Peak Court was the former judicial officer who retired from the post of civil judge (senior section) in the City Civil Court of Calcutta. The complainant claimed in the Fir that she had come into contact with the appellant who lived separately from his wife, as she did the case arising from the marriage dispute with her ex -hus band. The appellant gave the assurance that he would marry her and take the responsibility of her son and her son out of her first marriage after her divorce from her husband of her husband. But when he was divorced, the appellant began to ignore him and told him not to make contact with him. What did the bank say? The bank said that even if the allegations accepted as correct in the FIR and the charge sheet, it is impossible for the complainant to make physical relations with the appellant only on the basis of marriage insurance. Considering the factual aspects of the case, it is clear that physical relationships between the complainant and the appellant were formed with permission and cannot be said that it was against or against his will. So the woman cannot accuse him of rape. The Pillpoint Court decided to abolish the proceedings in the ‘interest of justice’. With the acceptance of the appeal, the bank canceled the Supreme Court order in February 2024, saying that the appellant received anticipating bail from the Supreme Court in January 2016. Every latest news and accurate information from the country and the world, every moment on your phone! Download now- Jagran app