Promise to marry not always rape, rules Chhattisgarh HC, conviction quashed
No proof of force or cheating, says court
Bilaspur | Correspondent: Delivering a significant legal ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court has clarified that reneging on a promise to marry does not, under all circumstances, amount to rape. While quashing the conviction of an individual, a single-judge bench comprising Justice Rajani Dubey observed that unless it is proven that the promise of marriage was false 'ab initio' (from the very beginning) and was made solely with the intention of establishing physical relations, it cannot be deemed an offense under Section 376 of the IPC.
The Court delivered this verdict in response to a petition in which the accused challenged the lower court's decision convicting him. According to the background of the case, the accused and the victim were involved in a romantic relationship spanning approximately three years from 2004 to 2006, during which they also engaged in continuous physical relations.
The matter reached the police, and an FIR was subsequently registered only after the victim became pregnant, gave birth to a child, and the accused refused to marry her during a village meeting.
During the hearings, the High Court noted that the prosecution had completely failed to prove that the victim's consent was obtained through any form of deception or coercion. The victim herself admitted that she was in love with the accused and that their relationship had been voluntary and long-standing.
The Court placed particular emphasis on the fact that the victim filed the complaint only after the accused refused to marry her, a circumstance indicating that the relationship was based on mutual consent.
Regarding the dispute over the victim's age, the Court observed that the prosecution failed to produce any concrete or legally admissible evidence establishing that the victim was a minor; consequently, the facts of the case were evaluated on the premise that she was an adult.
Underscoring the paucity of evidence, the Court further noted that a DNA test of the child had not been conducted in this case. The name of the father had been recorded in the birth register solely based on the victim's statements, evidence which, in the eyes of the law, cannot be regarded as conclusive proof. In her verdict, Justice Rajani Dubey clarified that the numerous inconsistencies and deficiencies present in the prosecution's case work in favor of the accused, and that he is entitled to the 'benefit of doubt.'
The High Court concluded that, since there is no evidence on record to establish that the accused harbored a deceptive intent from the very outset or that he engaged in sexual relations under coercion, the lower court's decision to convict him is not legally sound. On this basis, the Chhattisgarh High Court has set aside the conviction of the accused and acquitted him of all charges.
