A Division Bench of Justices Rahul Chaturvedi and Nand Prabha Shukla said the burden of proof, the court noted, rests on both the complainant and the accused in such cases.
Allahabad: The Allahabad High Court recently made observations in a case involving allegations of rape based on a false promise of marriage, where it upheld the acquittal of the accused.
READ ALSO: Dalit Rape Case| Sentenced to Life Imprisonment for Minor Girl’s Rape in Uttar Pradesh
The court emphasized that while laws on sexual offenses are primarily aimed at protecting the dignity and honor of women, this does not imply that the male partner is always at fault.
A Division Bench of Justices Rahul Chaturvedi and Nand Prabha Shukla said the burden of proof, the court noted, rests on both the complainant and the accused in such cases.
In this particular case, the complainant alleged that the accused had established a sexual relationship under the promise of marriage but later refused to marry her. Additionally, she claimed that the accused had made derogatory remarks about her caste.
The Court noted that
Chapter XVI, “Sexual Offences,” is specifically designed to protect the dignity and honor of women and girls, which is appropriate. However, the Court emphasized that in such cases, it is not always the male partner who is at fault, and the burden of proof lies with both parties involved.
The case in question involved the complainant’s appeal against the acquittal of the accused in a rape case. The accused had also been charged under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
In 2019, the complainant filed a police report alleging that the accused had established a sexual relationship with her under the false promise of marriage but later refused to marry her. She also accused him of making derogatory remarks about her caste.
READ ALSO: Husband’s Unnatural Sex With Wife Not Amount To Rape: Madhya Pradesh HC
The accused was chargesheeted in 2020. Earlier this year, the trial court acquitted him of the rape charge and convicted him only under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for voluntarily causing hurt.
Following the trial court’s verdict, the complainant filed an appeal.
The accused responded by asserting that their relationship was consensual and that he decided not to marry her after discovering that her actual caste was not ‘Yadav,’ as she had claimed.
After reviewing the arguments and evidence, the Court found that the complainant had been married to another man in 2010 but had been living separately from him for the past two years.
Despite these allegations, the trial court acquitted the accused of rape charges and convicted him only under a lesser charge of voluntarily causing hurt.
Upon appeal by the complainant, the accused argued that the relationship was consensual and that he decided not to marry her upon discovering discrepancies in her caste identity.
The High Court considered various aspects, including the complainant’s marital status prior to the alleged incidents, inconsistencies in her statements, and her failure to clarify her caste details. The court concluded that the evidence suggested a consensual relationship where both parties were aware of the consequences of their actions.
In this context, the Court observed that the complainant was unable to clarify her caste claim.
“Therefore, it can be easily inferred that a woman who is already married and has not dissolved her previous marriage, while also concealing her caste, maintained a physical relationship for five years without objection or hesitation. Both parties visited various hotels and lodges in Allahabad and Lucknow, enjoying each other’s company. It is difficult to determine who is deceiving whom,” the Court stated.
The Court concluded that the trial court had rightly acquitted the accused.
“It is untenable to propose that the female partner was exploited by the male partner for five years under the so-called false promise of marriage. Both individuals are adults who understand the gravity and far-reaching repercussions of premarital sex. Despite this, they maintained their relationship across different locations and cities. This indicates that the allegations of sexual harassment and rape cannot be accepted,” the Court remarked.
READ ALSO: SC Agrees To Hear Case on Martial Rape
It noted that the complainant had maintained the relationship for several years across different locations without objection, which raised doubts about the allegations of rape and sexual harassment.
Ultimately, the High Court upheld the trial court’s decision, stating that it was untenable to accept the claim that the complainant, as the “weaker sex,” was exploited by the accused over a prolonged period under false promises. The court highlighted the importance of considering all circumstances and evidence impartially in such cases, maintaining fairness to both parties involved.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
