Criminal Trident Pack: IPC, CrPC and IEA by Sr. Adv. G.S Shukla and Adv. Raghav Arora
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Ipc 376 - allegation accepted in bail but denied in 313

Page no : 2

Suneet Gupta (www.vashiadvocates.com)     22 January 2015

Some quotations of the SC (from the case referred by 'Compelled to Learn Law') - https://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=40427

  1. ... in a case like this, the court must very carefully examine whether the accused had actually wanted to marry the victim, or had mala fide motives, and had made a false promise to this effect only to satisfy his lust ...
  2. There may be a case where the prosecutrix agrees to have s*xual intercourse on account of her love and passion for the accused, and not solely on account of mis-representation made to her by the accused, or where an accused on account of circumstances which he could not have foreseen, or which were beyond his control, was unable to marry her, despite having every intention to do so. Such cases must be treated differently. An accused can be convicted for rape only if the court reaches a conclusion that the intention of the accused was mala fide, and that he had clandestine motives.
  3. ... the court has to see whether the person giving the consent had given it under fear of injury or misconception of fact and the court should also be satisfied that the person doing the act i.e. the alleged offender, is conscious of the fact or should have reason to think that but for the fear or misconception, the consent would not have been given. This is the scheme of Section 90 which is couched in negative terminology.
  4. Section 90 IPC cannot be called into aid in such a situation, to pardon the act of a girl in entirety, and fasten criminal liability on the other, unless the court is assured of the fact that from the very beginning, the accused had never really intended to marry her.
  5. The Court's final order - If the prosecutrix was in fact going to Ambala to marry the appellant, as stands fully established from the evidence on record, we fail to understand on what basis the allegation of “false promise of marriage” has been raised by the prosecutrix. We also fail to comprehend the circumstances in which a charge of deceit/rape can be leveled against the appellant, in light of the afore-mentioned fact situation. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant, who has already served more than 3 years sentence, is entitled to the benefit of doubt. Therefore, the appeal succeeds and is allowed. His conviction and sentences awarded by the courts below are set aside.

Jai Karan Nagwan (consultant)     22 January 2015

I know about many judgement of SC on this, but dont want to flow with. Ho further comment from my side, however, would suggest all to read:-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED  :  19-02-2010
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. NAGAMUTHU
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.719 OF 2004

Ravi S/o. Rama Pillai					..  Petitioner

			Vs.

State by Inspector of Police,
Vadaponparapi Police Station,
Villupuram District
in Cr.No.261 of 1999				..  Respondent

	Revision filed under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C., against the judgment and conviction passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Kallakurichi, Villupuram District in S.C.No.160 of 2002 dated 19.3.2003 and confirmed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Kallakurichi, Villupuram District, in C.A.No.47 of 2003, dated 5.4.2004.

THIS IS FOR GROUP UNDERSTANDING, IF ANY ONE OPEN TO RECEIVE THE INTENT OF ACT AND PUNISHMENT

Suneet Gupta (www.vashiadvocates.com)     22 January 2015

Quote from above Judgement referred by 'Jai Karan Nagwan' - https://judis.nic.in/judis_chennai/qrydisp.aspx?filename=24449

This conduct of the accused is yet another incriminating circumstance to show that from the very inception the accused was playing only fraud on P.W.1.

Operative word - 'from the very inception', therefore, even here the HC has held that the initial promise-to-marry must be fraudulent and given with intent to deceive, for a case of mis-informed consent and rape to be made out.

Distressgirlfreinds (minister)     29 January 2015

Dear compel to learn law can i have your id and contact number?need to discuss a case,send e.mail in  distressgirlfreinds2014@gmail.com

CompelledToLearnLaw (Financial Examiner)     29 January 2015

Dear DistressGirl, I’m not a lawyer, nor an expert. So no use discussing ur case with me.

 

 

Advice: sometimes there r stupid laws: u don’t have to invoke them. Courtroom drama will make u suffer too. Try to let the matter go. Try to understand that people fall out of love. Not everyone but, at least, some do. Try to accept it. 

raj bisht   13 March 2018

Yeah i agree with "compelled". This is not rape. If u r old enough to have s*x with someone then u r also old enough to think about other consequences as well

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Recent Topics


View More

Related Threads


Loading

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query