False promise of marriage cases: Allahabad HC on pre-trial quashing under Section 69 BNS
The Allahabad High Court has held that criminal proceedings under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging sexual relations on
The Allahabad High Court has held that criminal proceedings under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging sexual relations on
Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 creates a distinct offence of sexual intercourse by deceitful means, including a false promise of marriage, and the allegations in the FIR disclose prima facie facts justifying continuation of the criminal proceedings.
“The consent given by the prosecutrix to sexual intercourse with a person with whom she is deeply in love with, on a promise that he would marry her, cannot be considered to be given under a misconception of fact.”
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
“In a prosecution for the offence of rape, the building or the place where the sexual intercourse between the offender and the survivor took place, was one of the facts which constituted the state of things under which the occasion or cause of rape happened.”
“The prima facie conclusion that the accused had not committed any offence under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC, automatically lead to a conclusion that they had not committed an offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.”
“It cannot be held that the complainant had been compelled into a sexual relationship on the false pretext of marriage, particularly when she herself continued to meet the petitioner and maintain sexual relations with him even after becoming aware that he had contracted another marriage”
“The prosecution could not convince the Court that the custodial interrogation of the accused was necessary but opined that he must subject himself to interrogation for the purpose of completing the investigation under a limited custody”
“While considering the cases alleging rape based on the promise of marriage, it is difficult for this Court at this juncture to enter a conclusion regarding whether the relationship was consensual or not.”
“In Indian societal norms, the matters relating to sexual assault in large number of cases are not being reported by women timely… The possibility of accused taking benefit of the situation… cannot be ruled out.”
The Court opined that the chats depicted the stark reality about the behavioural pattern of the complainant who appeared to be having manipulative and vindictive tendency.
The Court directed accused to handover his all electronic gadgets like mobile, laptop etc. to the investigating agency along with the password of his all social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, whatsapp etc. for the investigation.
No doubt, offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner-accused is of heinous nature, but guilt, if any, of the petitioner is yet to be established on record by leading cogent and convincing evidence.
Supreme Court took note of the evident consent of the complainant as well as her parents and daughter, who were living in the same house.
“The cases involving emotional situations where the parties of the story have taken decisions and acted upon them on the basis of peculiar circumstances of their lives, have to be adjudged and adjudicated according to their own peculiarity and situational dissection of facts.”
The Complainant had filed a second FIR against the accused just after the parties had arrived at a settlement before the Court and the first FIR against the accused was quashed.
The Allahabad High Court had directed the Astrology Department of Lucknow University to determine if the alleged rape victim is a Mangalik, after the accused refused to marry her due to her Mangal Dosh.
The Supreme Court observed that the prosecutrix had betrayed her husband and three children by having relationship with the accused during the subsistence of her marriage and had continued to live with the accused even after finding out that he was a married man having children.
Delhi High Court: In an application under Section 389 read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC)
Bombay High Court: Anuja Prabhudessai, J., examines whether on mere refusal to marry the offence of cheating be constituted under Section 417