The Calcutta High Court dismissed a man’s appeal against his rape conviction, holding that sex obtained on a false promise of marriage is not valid consent and attracts consequences. The court upheld his sentence awarded by Murshidabad sessions court.
KOLKATA: The Calcutta High Court has rejected an appeal from a man convicted of rape under the pretext of a false promise of marriage, asserting that such an argument cannot be considered valid consent and that he must face the repercussions of his actions.
The accused was sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment for rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code in 2014 by the Kandi sessions court in Murshidabad district. The conviction stemmed from a complaint filed on January 1, 2006, which alleged that he had engaged in a relationship with the woman based on a false assurance of marriage.
The court noted,
“The intention of the accused right from the beginning was not bona fide, and the poor girl submitted to the lust of the accused, completely being misled by the accused who made the promise of marriage if she gave him a child.”
An FIR was lodged at the Burwan police station after the accused, who was already married to another woman, declined to marry the complainant when she and her family approached him following her pregnancy with his child.
In a recent ruling, Justice Chaitali Chatterjee dismissed the man’s appeal, finding it lacking in merit.
The court stated,
“This kind of consent taken by the accused with clear intention not to fulfil the promise and persuading the girl to believe that he is going to marry her and obtained her consent for the sexual intercourse under total misconception and hence cannot be treated to be a consent,”
Also Read: ‘Bundle of Lies’: Supreme Court Quashes Rape FIR Filed on False Promise of Marriage
Justice Chatterjee added,
“The appellant must face the consequences of his misdeed for the egregious offence committed with the lady with a mala fide intention from the beginning.”
The convict’s lawyer requested his acquittal on the grounds that the complainant, aged 20 to 21, was an adult and that her voluntary engagement in a sexual relationship with him should not be classified as rape.
He further argued that the complainant was aware of the appellant’s marital status during their relationship.
In contrast, the prosecution lawyer countered the request for acquittal, contending that the appellant had never been genuinely interested in marrying the victim; instead, he had only offered her a false promise to satisfy his desires.
- Provisions Relating to Rape Under False Promise of marriage:
The provision contained in Section 69 of B.N.S. is a new induction in penal law, wherein sexual intercourse with a woman, by deceitful means including false promise of marriage is not ‘Rape’, but is made punishable. Prior to the enactment the courts interpret the conduct of parties in view of the provisions of Section 375 I.P.C. (Rape) coupled with the provision of Section 90 I.P.C (Consent known to be given under fear or misconception).
The explanation provided under Section 69 B.N.S. of ‘Deceitful means’ “shall include the false promise of employment or promotion, inducement, or marrying after suppressing identity.”