The Supreme Court on Thursday suspended the sentence of a man convicted of rape on the pretext of marriage, after both he and the complainant expressed their willingness to marry each other.

A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma interacted with the couple in-chamber during the lunch break and noted their mutual consent to solemnise the marriage.

“We met the parties in-chamber in the lunch session. The parties have both unequivocally expressed their desire to marry each other,” the Court observed. Following this, the Bench invited the man to propose to the woman inside the courtroom and asked the two to exchange flowers.

While suspending the sentence, the Court said:

"They (the accused and the victim) are willing to marry each other. The details of the marriage shall be worked out by their respective parents. We hope that the marriage takes place as expeditiously as possible."

The Court ordered the petitioner to return to jail following the day’s hearing, with instructions that he be produced before the concerned sessions court at the earliest. It further directed the sessions court to release him on bail, subject to appropriate conditions.

The matter has been adjourned to July 25.

Advocate Nikhil Jain appeared for the prosecutrix.

The man had approached the Supreme Court challenging a September 5, 2024 order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which had denied his plea for suspension of sentence under Section 389(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

The case dates back to a 2021 FIR, in which the man was accused of repeatedly raping the woman between 2016 and 2021 under the false assurance of marriage. According to the complaint, the two met on Facebook through the man's sister and developed a relationship. The woman alleged that they had physical relations multiple times, each time on the promise that he would eventually marry her.

However, when she pressed him for marriage, he declined, citing his mother's disapproval.

In September 2024, a trial court convicted the accused under Sections 376(2)(n) (repeated rape) and 417 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 376(2)(n) and two years under Section 417.

After the High Court refused to grant him relief, he sought intervention from the Supreme Court.