A man accused of rape under the guise of marriage, after connecting with a woman on the dating app "Hinge," was granted bail by the Delhi High Court on Wednesday.

The division bench, comprising Justice Vikas Mahajan, stressed that the communications between the accused and the complainant did not indicate any discussions or proposals regarding marriage. This underscored the perceived "consensual nature" of their relationship.

The court noted that the initial connection between the complainant and the accused was made through the dating app "Hinge," rather than a platform intended for matrimonial purposes. After reviewing numerous WhatsApp messages exchanged between them, the court emphasized that none of these messages contained any indication of a promise or proposal of marriage by the accused.

In the examination-in-chief, the complainant revealed that even after learning about the accused's misrepresented educational qualifications, she chose to stay with him at an Airbnb for four days. During this time, they engaged in repeated consensual sexual encounters.

In reference to explicit photographs and videos found on the accused's phone, the judge highlighted that during cross-examination, the complainant admitted that these materials were taken with her explicit "consent."

The court affirmed that the sexual intercourse appeared prima facie consensual, noting the absence of evidence indicating false promises or consent obtained under a misconception. The single-judge bench was handling a plea filed by a man seeking bail in a case where he was charged under Sections 376 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

It was revealed that the accused and the complainant met on Hinge and developed a relationship. Initially, the accused had claimed to possess an engineering degree from IIT Kharagpur, double masters from the UK and New Zealand, and a PhD from Kings College, London. However, it later emerged that he was only a BSc graduate.

The complainant claimed that, despite discovering the misrepresentation by the accused, she provided nearly Rs. 1.2 crore for medical treatment.

According to the prosecution, the initial payment of Rs. 25,000 was made in January 2021. Despite the accused not returning the money, the complainant continued to provide substantial sums thereafter. After reviewing the arguments and considering the overall circumstances, the court concluded that the accused had presented a case warranting regular bail.

"Accordingly, the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing a Personal Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- and one Surety Bond of the like amount," the court ordered.