A NEW husband raped his bride, assaulted her and refused to allow her to visit her family, a jury heard.

Bolton Crown Court was told that the husband, who cannot be named for legal reasons, began controlling his wife's life shortly after their marriage in 2016.

He decided how she should dress, whether she went out, took away her mobile phone and stopped her visiting her own family, said Robert Golinski, prosecuting.

And he added that on five occasions, during the four months they were together, he raped her.

The husband, in his 20s, denies five counts of rape and a charge of engaging in coercive and controlling behaviour.

Mr Golinski told a jury of six men and six women that the wife came to the UK from Pakistan in 2013 to study for a degree at university.

Relatives introduced her to her future husband and, after they married five months later, she moved to his family's home in Bolton.

But the relationship started to deteriorate after just two or three weeks.

"As time went on the defendant sought to exercise more and more control over his new wife," said Mr Golinski.

The bride was expected to do all the cooking and cleaning and then he started making comments about her clothing.

"[She] was used to wearing the sort of clothes which the majority of young woman at a British university might wear," said Mr Golinski.

"The defendant wanted her to wear more traditional Asian clothing. She was also being pressurised by his father in the same way."

Then, less than month after the wedding, during an argument in the car, the husband threatened to throw her out onto the motorway and, when they got home he attacked her, slapping her and twisting her arms.

The jury was told that the husband's behaviour became more controlling, restricting where she went and he did not want her going out on her own.

"In effect he wanted to monitor her movements. At some point it seems that she was not allowed house keys and doors inside the house were locked," said Mr Golinski, who added that he also limited her contact with her family.

He said: "The prosecution say that this controlling behaviour made her vulnerable and progressed further into the bedroom. The defendant appears to have considered that, as her husband, he had a right to have sex with her when he wanted, even if she didn't want to and it was obvious that she didn't."

An argument ensued when the husband forbade his wife from going to celebrate Eid with her family and then, when she refused to have sex he told her he was 'not bothered what she thought' and raped her.

Later the same month he again refused to allow her to visit her family, pushed her against the wall and slapped her, but when he went to punch her he missed and hit the wall, injuring his hand.

The jury was told that more rapes followed in subsequent weeks, the final time when the woman told her husband she wanted to finish her university studies.

Two days later he took her phone from her and twisted her arm.

When the defendant's mother took her to the GP and he saw her injuries the doctor contacted her family and they collected her.

"She never returned," said Mr Golinski.

At first she was encouraged to return to her husband but eventually, a week later, police were contacted.

When arrested the husband claimed the relationship had 'its ups and downs' but denied raping his wife, assaulting her or restricting her movements.

"This case is primarily about what happened and who is telling the truth," Mr Golinski told the jury.

The case continues.