Victim Had Sufficient Intelligence To Understand Significance And Moral Quality Of Act: Bombay HC Quashes FIR For Rape On False Promise Of Marriage

The Court was hearing an appeal by the applicant who sought to quash the First Information Report and chargesheet for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The bench comprising Justice Vinay Joshi and Justice Vrushali V. Joshi observed, “It emerges that the victim was a grown-up girl studying in the Engineering college…The victim had sufficient intelligence to understand the significance and moral quality of the act, she was consenting for the relations...Efforts were also made by families to fix the marriage during initial two years. All these things are sufficient to indicate that both had agreed to marry, though the applicant expressed his desire to marry however it cannot be said that, his intention was to deceive since inception.”

Advocate Sahil Mate appeared for the Applicant and Advocate Prakash S. Tiwari appeared for the Respondent.

Brief Facts-

It is the case of the prosecution that the informant lady lodged the report alleging that the applicant had committed sexual intercourse against her will and without her consent. It is her case, that under the false pretext of marriage, her consent was obtained for establishing sexual relations and thus, the consent obtained by misconception of fact is vitiated amounting to the offence of rape.

The Court mentioned the decision of the Supreme Court in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs State of Maharashtra and anr. (2019) 9 SCC 608 in which the SC took a review on earlier decisions and summarised the legal position. The Court quoted, “…the “consent” of a woman concerning Section 375 must involve an active and reasoned deliberation towards the proposed act. To establish whether the “consent” was vitiated by a “misconception of fact” arising out of a promise to marry, two propositions must be established. The promise of marriage must have been a false promise, given in bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was given. The false promise itself must be of immediate relevance or bear a direct nexus to the woman’s decision to engage in the sexual act.”

The Court held that the consent was not actuated by misrepresentation as both were known to each other from years together, they used to meet regularly, travelled long distances, resided in each other's house on multiple occasions, and engaged in sex regularly for 5 years.

The Court stated that to constitute the offence the promise of marriage must have been a false promise, given in bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was given.

According to the Court, it was not a clandestine transaction since the applicant boy had disclosed his relationship and desire to marry to his parents. Moreover, the Court noted that the applicant’s parents travelled to settle the marriage and also had a talk about the mode and manner of marriage.

The Court noted that the applicant brought forward a case indicating a change in the victim's behaviour. Previously, the victim allegedly abused, pressured and harassed the applicant through repeated calls. Consequently, the applicant filed a report with the police, expressing concern that the victim might falsely accuse him.

The Court found it difficult to hold that the applicant had deceitful intent while expressing his desire to marry as for the first 3 years both wanted to marry, families were involved and agreeable to marriage.

The Court stated that material collected prima facie showed that it was not a case of obtaining the consent of the victim by giving a false promise to marry.

Accordingly, the Court quashed the FIR and set aside the chargesheet.

Finally, the Court allowed the application.