GUWAHATI: The Supreme Court has quashed a rape case against a man accused of forcible sex under the pretext of marriage, reiterating that a breach of a promise to marry does not automatically amount to rape unless fraudulent intent existed at the time of consent.
ALSO READ: Centre To Implement Unified Pension Scheme From April 1 For 23 Lakh Employees
A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran on Monday, March 24, observed that the woman had accompanied the accused to a hotel room on three occasions, and there was no evidence of deception at the time of consent. The court found that her repeated willingness to accompany the man contradicted her claims of coercion.
The ruling came after the accused had challenged the Madras High Court’s decision, which had refused to quash the FIR against him under Sections 376 (rape) and 420 (cheating) of the IPC.
The victim alleged that the man had coerced her into sexual intercourse three times under a false promise of marriage. She claimed that after the first incident, where she alleged that intercourse was forced, he promised to marry her but later refused. Despite her distress, she accompanied him to a hotel room two more times, alleging coercion each time.
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s ruling, finding that the victim's repeated actions were inconsistent with her claims of force. "The victim had categorically stated that after the first and second incidents, she was mentally upset, but that did not stop her from again accompanying the accused to hotel rooms," the court noted.
The judgment referenced the case of Prithvirajan vs. The State, which established that rape charges on the ground of false promise to marry require proof that the accused never intended to marry the complainant at the outset. In the present case, the court found no evidence of such fraudulent intent.
Observing that the allegations lacked credibility, the Supreme Court further ruled that the case was an abuse of the legal process and directed the quashing of proceedings before the Sessions Judge (Mahila Court), Erode.
Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, and the criminal proceedings against the accused were dismissed.