Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
G.BASAVARAJA
Swamynaika S/o Kempanaika – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction appeal context (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. details of the incident leading to the complaint (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. prosecution's case presentation (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. arguments presented by both sides (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. legal questions for consideration (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. supreme court precedents on consent and false promise (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 22) |
| 7. conclusion on the definition of rape (Para 20 , 21) |
| 8. final order and compensation directive (Para 23) |
JUDGMENT :
G.BASAVARAJA, J.
1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the VII Additional Sessions Judge, Mysuru (for short "the trial Court").
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their rank and status before the trial Court.
3. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that, H.D.Kote Police submitted charge sheet against the accused for the commission of offence under sections 376, 417 of Indian Penal Code.
4. It is alleged by the prosecution that the Prosecutrix and the accused are the residents of Hatvalu Village, H.D.Kote Taluk. The Prosecutrix is not married. She is the only daughter of CW4-Malligamma. Her husband had
A consensual relationship, even with a promise to marry, does not constitute rape if the other party is aware of the accused's marital status and consents willingly.
Criminal Law - Charge of Rape - Conviction Upheld - Age of Prosecutrix - Victim was at her tender age when she met the appellant on her way to school. There is no evidence at all that they were in de....
The prosecution failed to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, as the trial court did not properly analyze evidence, particularly the DNA results excluding the accused as the biological....
Consent in sexual relationships must be scrutinized for deception linked to promises of marriage; a mere breach does not equate to coercion or rape.
Prolonged consensual relationships undermine claims of rape under false promises, indicating that consent may not be vitiated by misconception of fact.
Consent given under a misconception of fact does not constitute valid consent; a prolonged consensual relationship negates claims of forceful sexual relations.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
