As per case facts, the prosecutrix, a married lady, alleged that the accused, also married, lured her into a relationship including physical relations from 2016 based on a false promise ... of marriage after divorce, exploiting her emotionally, physically, and financially. She filed a police complaint after discovering his involvement with another woman and his continued marriage, but the accused later continued his actions. Her family life was destroyed. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the relationship consensual. The appellant challenged this acquittal. The question arose whether the prosecutrix's consent was vitiated by a false promise of marriage, thus constituting rape. Finally, the High Court determined that both parties were educated and married, aware of the legal impediments to marriage. The prosecutrix maintained the relationship for a long period willingly. The Court found no evidence that the promise was false from the inception or that allegations of blackmailing, physical injuries, or financial misappropriation were proven. It was concluded to be a consensual relationship between two adults, and the prosecution failed to prove rape beyond reasonable doubt, thus dismissing the appeal and upholding the acquittal.