Morality Must Be Kept Separate From Criminality: Delhi HC Grants Bail After Noting Consensual Romantic Relationship

The Delhi High Court has granted regular bail to a man accused of sexually assaulting and blackmailing a woman after observing that the material placed before it prima facie reflected a consensual romantic relationship between the parties.

The Court underscored that “morality has to be kept separate from the offence” while considering questions concerning personal liberty, particularly while rejecting the prosecution’s argument that the accused, being a married man with a child, did not deserve the discretionary relief of bail.

Justice Girish Kathpalia passed the order while allowing the regular bail application filed by accused for offences under Sections 308(2), 351(2), 64(2)(m) and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Directing the accused’s release on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000 with one surety of the like amount, the Court observed that the prosecutrix was an educated 30 year old practising advocate and that the material presently available on record did not prima facie establish a non-consensual relationship.

The Court particularly referred to photographs and video clips produced by the defence, which according to it reflected that the parties were happily involved in a romantic relationship.

The prosecution case arose out of allegations made by the prosecutrix, who stated that she had developed friendship with the accused after joining his gym.

According to her complaint, the accused allegedly administered an intoxicating substance to her through a drink, after which she became unconscious and was taken to an Oyo hotel in Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad, where he allegedly sexually assaulted her.

She further alleged that the accused clicked objectionable photographs of her and thereafter repeatedly sexually exploited and blackmailed her by threatening to circulate those pictures on social media.

On behalf of the accused, it was argued that the relationship between the parties was entirely consensual and that the FIR was lodged only after the relationship turned sour.

The defence highlighted that the prosecutrix was fully aware that the accused was a married man and had a child. It was also argued that she was older than the accused and was fully capable of understanding the nature and consequences of her actions.

As regards the financial allegations, counsel submitted that it was in fact the accused who had transferred money to the prosecutrix and spent on her through online transactions.

The Court further observed that the prosecutrix was neither a minor nor an illiterate or vulnerable person incapable of understanding her actions; she was approximately 30 years old and was a practising advocate “fully aware of what is good for her.”

Importantly, the Court also observed that the prosecutrix had not alleged that the relationship had been initiated or sustained on the basis of any false promise of marriage.

It was also noted that while the alleged intoxicating substance was administered at the accused’s gym situated in Dilshad Colony, Delhi, the alleged incident of sexual assault was said to have taken place at an Oyo hotel in Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad, which was prima facie, difficult to understand how a person who had allegedly lost consciousness could have travelled such a considerable distance from Delhi to Ghaziabad.

The APP had argued that since the accused was married and had a child, he ought not to be granted bail for being involved in an extra-marital relationship.

The prosecution also attempted to emphasise that the accused and prosecutrix belonged to different religions.

Rejecting both submissions, the Court observed that “morality has to be kept separate from the offence” while deciding matters involving the liberty of an individual. 

Case Title: Sabir v. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

Bench: Justice Girish Kathpalia

Date of Judgment: 12.05.2026