Court Finds Allegations of Rape on False Promise of Marriage Unsupported by Evidence and Consensual Nature of Relationship
In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court quashed the rape charges against a police inspector, Amit Kumar, ruling that the relationship with the complainant was consensual and not based on a false promise of marriage. The judgment, delivered by Justice Madan Pal Singh, thoroughly examined the facts and circumstances surrounding the allegations and found them to be inconsistent with the prosecutrix's claims.
Amit Kumar, an Inspector in the Uttar Pradesh Police, was accused by the complainant, Kumari Mamata Sinsinwar alias Jiya, of rape on the pretext of marriage, along with charges under Sections 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 67A of the Information Technology Act. The allegations included claims of non-consensual intercourse, blackmail, and concealment of Kumar's prior marriage.
However, the High Court, after a detailed review of the evidence, including WhatsApp chats and photographs, determined that the relationship was consensual. The judgment highlighted that the prosecutrix, an educated adult, willingly engaged in the relationship despite being aware of Kumar's existing marriage and pending divorce. The court noted that the prosecutrix traveled alone to Varanasi to meet Kumar, stayed with him willingly, and continued the relationship over a significant period.
The court emphasized the necessity of proving that a promise of marriage was false from the inception and made solely to obtain consent for sexual relations. It concluded that the evidence did not support the claim of a false promise, noting the prosecutrix's knowledge of Kumar's marital status and her voluntary continuation of the relationship.
The judgment further pointed out that no obscene photographs or videos, allegedly used for blackmail, were produced during the investigation. The court criticized the continuation of criminal proceedings in the absence of substantive evidence, deeming it an abuse of the legal process.
In conclusion, the court quashed the charge-sheet and proceedings against Amit Kumar, highlighting that the allegations did not constitute rape as defined under Section 376 IPC. This judgment underscores the importance of distinguishing between consensual relationships and criminal acts based on false pretenses.
Bottom Line :
Rape on false promise of marriage - For attracting Section 376 IPC, prosecution must show that promise to marry was false from inception and consent was obtained solely on that basis - Where prosecutrix was a major, educated woman, remained in relationship with accused for considerable period, was aware of his subsisting marriage and agreed to wait till divorce, and material on record indicated consensual relationship, continuance of criminal proceedings amounted to abuse of process - Charge-sheet and proceedings quashed.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 67A of the Information Technology Act, Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Amit Kumar v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2989089
