The Bombay High Court dismissed a petition filed by Petitioner, seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against him under sections 376, 493, 494, and 496 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The complaint was lodged by a widow, who alleged that Mr. Ahire had misrepresented his marital status, leading her to believe they were married, and subsequently abandoned her.

1. Case Background:

The petitioner, Mr. Subhash Vitthal Ahire, was accused of deceiving a widow into believing that he had divorced his first wife and had legally married her. The widow alleged that Ahire, who was once her tutor, took advantage of her emotional state following her husband's death. They reportedly married on June 18, 2014, and cohabited until January 31, 2016. During this period, she twice became pregnant but terminated both pregnancies. Later, she discovered that Ahire's first marriage was still valid and that he had misled her into the relationship.

2. Legal Proceedings:

Mr. Ahire filed a petition to quash the FIR, arguing that his relationship with the complainant was consensual and that she was aware of his marital status. The petitioner's counsel argued that since the complainant knew about the existing marriage and still engaged in the relationship, the FIR was baseless. The state and the complainant’s counsel, however, maintained that the complainant was misled and exploited, and the FIR should not be quashed.

3. Court's Observations:

The court noted that the essential facts of the case were undisputed, including the subsistence of the petitioner's first marriage at the time of the alleged second marriage. The court observed that in Hindu law, a second marriage while the first is still valid constitutes bigamy. The court further held that the petitioner's act of establishing a physical relationship under the false pretense of marriage could satisfy the ingredients of Section 376 of the IPC (rape).

4. Judgment:

The court, after considering the submissions and the investigation papers, concluded that there was sufficient prima facie evidence against Mr. Ahire to support the charges of bigamy and rape. The petition was found to be without merit and was accordingly dismissed, allowing the investigation to proceed.

5. Conclusion:

This judgment reinforces the legal principle that misrepresentation of marital status leading to a sexual relationship can attract charges of rape, and bigamy is punishable under Hindu law. The decision highlights the importance of honest disclosure in relationships and the legal repercussions of deceit in such matters.