My boyfriend has exploited me by spending money on me

My boyfriend and I had a relationship for 6 yrs. My boyfriend has exploited me by spending money on me and I spent too little as I was a student. We were both happy because he spent a lot of money on me and bore my study expenses.  But now I am unhappy with him. I wanted to break up with him but he was blackmailing. I said that he will be my father and give details about the money he spent on me. He abuses me everyday and is a mental torcher for me.

My boyfriend and I had a relationship for 6 yrs. My boyfriend has exploited me by spending money on me and I spent too little as I was a student. We were both happy because he spent a lot of money on me and bore my study expenses. 

But now I am unhappy with him. I wanted to break up with him but he was blackmailing. I said that he will be my father and give details about the money he spent on me. He abuses me everyday and is a mental torcher for me.

Your relationship was based on your free consent. It was a consensual relationship. You never demanded him to spend money or bore the study expenses. All he did with his choice and free will. However, you have also spent some money. 

There is nothing illegality between your relationship so you should not be worried. If he tells all these things to your father you should confidently defend yourself. Your father should understand you and your relationship. Spending money in love and affection is no offence. But unlawful demands in lieu of those expenses or monetary help may constitute offence. 

You can lodge a first information report (FIR) for the offence of extortion. Extortion is an offence and made punishable under Section 384 of Indian Penal Code. Your boyfriend is exploited you in lieu of spending money on you is an act of extortion.

Tags:

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Husband is demanding DNA test to check the paternity of our son in divorce case

The law does not permit a husband to compel his wife or child to undergo a DNA test merely on the basis of suspicion. In Gautam Kundu v. State of West Bengal (1993) 3 SCC 418, the Supreme Court held that a blood or DNA test cannot be directed as a matter of course. Before seeking such a direction, the husband must establish a strong prima facie case by proving that he had no access to his wife during the period when the child could have been conceived.

क्या चेक बाउंस का केस मियाद समाप्त होने के बाद भी दाखिल हो सकता है

Negotiable Instruments Act के अंतर्गत, वैधानिक अवधि समाप्त होने के बाद भी चेक बाउंस का मामला दायर किया जा सकता है। यदि शिकायतकर्ता देरी का उचित कारण प्रस्तुत करता है, तो न्यायालय विलंब को क्षमा कर शिकायत स्वीकार कर सकता है। नोटिस के बाद निर्धारित समय में भुगतान न होने पर कार्यवाही प्रारंभ की जा सकती है।

Cancellation of bail when accused tempering with witness

Seeking the cancellation of bail is possible when an accused person tampers with witnesses or influences a trial. This guide explains legal grounds for such actions, focusing on mandatory procedures under Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act and post-bail threats. Learn how victims can approach higher courts to ensure a fair trial and protect their rights.

Evidence of interested witness is admissible in criminal proceedings

In criminal law, the testimony of a related witness cannot be discarded solely due to their relationship with the victim. This legal overview clarifies the distinction between related and interested witnesses, citing key Supreme Court rulings. It explains how natural witnesses provide admissible evidence that reliably forms the basis for a conviction, even without independent corroboration.

SDM cannot attach property under section 146 crpc when civil suit is pending

A Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot legally attach property under Section 146 of the CrPC if a civil suit regarding the same property is already pending. This guide explains why such orders lack jurisdiction and outlines the proper legal remedy, including filing a petition under Section 482 CrPC to the High Court based on established Supreme Court precedents.