IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR, J.
Prakasha, S/o. Muddumadegowda - Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, Through Kavalande Police Station, Mysore Dist, Rep. By State Public Prosecutor High Court Of Karnataka – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 884 Of 2014
Decided On : 07-06-2024
Criminal Law - Rape and Cheating - IPC Sections 375, 415 - The court analyzed the definitions and elements of rape and cheating under IPC, emphasizing the necessity of consent and the burden of proof on the prosecution, ultimately finding insufficient evidence to uphold the conviction.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was charged with rape and cheating after the victim alleged he promised to marry her and then forcibly had sexual intercourse. The case involved contradictory statements and complaints from the victim regarding the nature of their relationship.
Finding of the Court:
The court found significant discrepancies in the victim's testimony and complaints, indicating a consensual relationship rather than one based on deceit or coercion. The prosecution failed to prove the essential elements of the alleged offences.
Issues: Whether the trial court's conviction was based on a proper appreciation of evidence and whether the prosecution proved the charges of rape and cheating beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution did not establish the essential elements of cheating and rape as defined under IPC, particularly regarding consent and the nature of the relationship between the parties.
Result: The appeal is allowed, and the accused is acquitted of all charges.
JUDGMENT :
(Ramachandra D. Huddar, J.) :
Appellant-accused has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment of his conviction dated 12.06.2014 and order of sentence dated 17.06.2014 passed in Sessions case No.78/2011 by VII Additional Sessions Judge, Mysuru.
2. Parties to this appeal are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court for convenience.
3. That accused who was charge sheeted by the Circle Inspector of Police, Nanjangud Circle in Crime No.179/2010 of Kowlande Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 417 and 376 of IPC.
4. That the victim girl filed a complaint before the Sub-Inspector, Kowlande Police Station, Nanjangud Taluk on 28.11.2010 at 8.30 p.m. by appearing before the Police Station alleging that she is the resident of Tagaduru Village, she was in love with her neighbour i.e., Prakash S/o Muddumadegowda (accused) for the last two years prior to filing of the complaint. It is alleged that for the last six months prior to filing of the complaint, he started cheating her. She used to inform him stating that because of that she is facing problems in her education. It is alleged that with an assurance to marry her, forcibly without hearing the words of the complainant, raped her. This fact was informed to the elderly members of her village. At that time, his father and uncle Shivu were called by the Panchayathdars of her village to Malle temple and conducted panchayath. In the said Panchayath, it was requested the accused to get marry the victim girl. At that time the father and uncle of the accused told the Panchayathdars, that in the recent future they intend to perform the marriage of sister of accused and prayed for two months time. Accordingly, two months time was granted. After two months time, even there was no response either from the accused or from his parents. They vacated the village. Despite calling of the accused and his father so also his uncle, they did not respond and went on postponing and did not come to the Tagaduru village. Therefore, a complaint came to be filed against them before the Kowlande Police Station. It is stated that twice they came to Kowlande police station and took two adjournments regarding the response. It is alleged that even then there was no response from them. Thus it is alleged by the complainant that, accused, his father Muddumadegowda, his wife Susheela and uncle so also his wife Pramila have committed the offence of cheating against the victim girl. With these allegations a complaint came to be filed before PW-19 Krishna Ramanna, the then Police Sub- Inspector of Kowlande police station. It was registered by him in Crime No.179/2010 and he registered the FIR as per Ex.P-20 based upon Ex.P-1 complaint and the said criminal law was set in motion.
5. PW-24 on taking up the investigation deputed the staff for the purpose of apprehending the accused. Accordingly, his staff apprehended the accused and produced before him. He arrested the accused. He also called the victim girl to the police station, seized her clothes worn by her. On 30.10.2010 he visited the Tagaduru village recorded the statements of the witnesses, he visited the scene of offence conducted the panchanama, subjected both accused and victim girl for medical examination. After completion of investigation by following all the formalities of investigation, filed charge sheet against the accused for the aforesaid offences.
6. Before the learned Sessions Judge, to bring home the guilt of the accused, prosecution in all examined 24 witnesses from PW-1 to PW-24 and got marked Exs.P1 to P29 with respective signatures and M.O.Nos.1 to 14. During the course of the cross examination Exs.D1 to D15 were marked.
7. On hearing the arguments and on evaluation of the evidence found the accused guilty for committing the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of IPC. Accordingly, sentenced him as under:
Consent in sexual relations must be informed and voluntary; mere promise of marriage does not constitute grounds for rape if the relationship is consensual.
When a charge for a major offence is not made out, conviction for a minor cognate offence, even in absence of a charge, can be sustained.
Consent given under a false promise of marriage is not considered valid consent, and the distinction between rape and consensual sex must be carefully examined based on the active and reasoned delibe....
The judgment underscores the necessity for corroborative evidence in sexual assault cases and the principle that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond a reasonable d....
Rape and cheating – Moral indignation cannot take place of legal proof that cohabitation of parties was on the basis of a dishonest representation of appellant.
The court ruled that consensual sexual relations among first cousins, lacking fraudulent intent, do not constitute rape or cheating under the IPC.
The conviction for rape under Section 376 IPC was overturned due to insufficient evidence of lack of consent and significant doubts raised by the circumstantial evidence.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that consent under fear or misconception is essential to establish the offence of rape, and the court's analysis of the victim's consent and act....
The absence of physical injuries does not negate a credible victim's testimony in rape cases, which can be sufficient for conviction.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.