Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
Radheshyam Shukla @ Radheshyam – Appellants
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr. – Respondents
CRR 102 of 2020
Decided on : 23-04-2024
False Promise of Marriage - Criminal Proceedings - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 448/417/376 - The court discussed the provisions of Sections 375, 376, and 417 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, along with the provisions of Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and their interpretations in the context of false promise of marriage and consent. The court highlighted the distinction between false promise and breach of promise, and emphasized the need for adequate evidence to show the accused's intention at the initial stage of the promise.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an Assistant Manager at a bank, was accused of making a false promise of marriage and engaging in a physical relationship with the victim. The petitioner denied the allegations and claimed that the victim had a history of making false allegations for financial gain.
Finding of the Court:
The court found a prima facie case against the petitioner for the alleged offences and dismissed the revision, allowing the case to proceed to trial.
Issues: The issues revolved around the allegations of a false promise of marriage, consent, and the petitioner's intention at the initial stage of the promise.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for adequate evidence to establish the accused's intention at the initial stage of the promise and highlighted the distinction between false promise and breach of promise.
Final Decision: The revision was dismissed, allowing the case to proceed to trial.
JUDGMENT :
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.
1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the proceedings in G.R. Case No. 3787 of 2019, currently pending before the Court of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Murshidabad at Berhampore, arising out of Jalangi Police Station Case No. 609 of 2019 dated 31.08.2019 under Sections 448/417/376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. The allegation in the Written Complaint filed by the Opposite Party No. 2 are to the following extent:-
3. The petitioner states that all such allegations as disclosed in the complaint are denied in totality. The entire story is a manufactured one, and in any event is one where it is clear that there is no involvement or role of the petitioner whatsoever as will be completely apparent from a scrutiny of the First Information Report in this present case.
4. The petitioner/accused has denied the entire case as stated by the victim/opposite party no.2.
5. The petitioner states that he is the actual victim of this proceeding as the opposite party no. 2 has made a habit of making money by way of making false and fabricated allegations. The petitioner is a respectful person in his working life but this false case has ruined his life completely. Petitioner’s employer i.e. the UCO Bank authority has declared to expel him from service for this case.
6. There is delay of almost 45 days to register this complaint without any explanation. Allegedly the date of incident was on 12.06.2019 and the complaint lodged on 31.08.2019, it is alleged in the complaint that the complainant used to visit the Bank frequently, where the petitioner used to work earlier but from 12.06.2019, (the date she disclosed) she did not state about her activity till 25.07.2019, when she came to know about this petitioner’s transfer to another branch.
7. The petitioner states that on 16.07.2019 his transfer order to Nabagram Branch has been issued and on 20.07.2019 he joined his new branch, thereafter the complainant planned to earn money by way of blackmailing the petitioner as she did earlier many times.
8. Hence the revision.
9. The opposite party no.2 has categorically stated that when she used to visit the Bank for her work, the petitioner/accused had proposed marriage to her and started visiting her house, when no one was present, and used to cohabit with her by having sexual Inter course. He allegedly took her to various places and stayed in hotels, where he also cohabited with her.
10. The petitioner also visited her on 12.06.2018 and also had sexual inter course with her and when at that time, she asked him about marriage, he assured to marry her, in a day or two.
11. Since then the petitioner did not keep any contact with her.
12. When the complainant/victim visited the bank on 25.07.2019, she was told that the petitioner had left on transfer.
13. From the case diary it appears that the victim/complainant is aged about 35 years as per medical report. The medical report of the victim prima facie supports her case of cohabitation.
14. The fact of the petitioner being the Assistant Manager of Sagarpara UCO Bank has also not been denied.
15. The copy of the attendance sheet of the petitioner in the case diary sh
Rape - Conviction confirmed and Bail rejected - Accused who gave promise to prosecutrix to marry, did not have any intention to marry and prosecutrix gave consent for sexual intercourse on such an a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for active understanding and reasoned deliberation for consent, the distinction between a false promise given in bad faith and a br....
Prolonged consensual relationships undermine claims of rape under false promises, indicating that consent may not be vitiated by misconception of fact.
Consent in sexual relationships must be scrutinized for deception linked to promises of marriage; a mere breach does not equate to coercion or rape.
The validity of consent in cases involving a false promise to marry and the application of Section 90 of IPC to determine the impact of a false promise on consent.
Consent given under a misconception of fact does not constitute valid consent; a prolonged consensual relationship negates claims of forceful sexual relations.
The consensual nature of a long-term relationship between parties negates accusations of rape, even when one party claims a false promise of marriage. Consent cannot be construed as given under misco....
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
