Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
Vikas Bhushan – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding the nature of consent (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. scope of inquiry under section 227 cr.p.c. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. analysis of the allegations and prima facie case (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. conclusion of the court on the petition (Para 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. (Oral)--The present revision petition has been filed under Section 397 Cr.P.C. read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner assailing the order dated 07.04.2021 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (SFTC-01), West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in SC No. 127/21 arising out of FIR No. 265/2020 registered under Section 376 IPC at Police Station Ranjit Nagar, Delhi, whereby application filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 227 Cr.P.C. seeking discharge in the aforesaid case was disposed of and charges under Sections 376(2)(n)/417 IPC framed against him.
2. Briefly stated, the facts, as noted by the Trial Court, are as under:
"02. The brief facts of the case are that a complaint was made by Ms. "A" to the effect that she had come to Delhi for preparation of competitive exam, came in contact with
The promise to marry cannot justify consent to sexual relations if proven false; each case's uniqueness must be examined to assess consent's legitimacy.
Consent for physical relationships is valid if based on genuine intentions to marry, distinguishing false promises from breaches of promise.
The main legal point established is the requirement for a prima facie case and the judicial duty to weigh the evidence before framing charges, especially in cases involving false promise of marriage ....
The court reaffirmed that at the stage of charge framing, the focus is on whether a prima facie case exists, restricting judicial inquiry to grave suspicions, not evidentiary details.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between false promise and breach of promise in cases involving consent under Section 375 IPC, emphasizing the requirement for an ac....
The promise to marry must be false from inception to constitute an offence under section 376 IPC; a consensual relationship over time does not amount to rape.
Promise of marriage must be established as false from the outset to vitiate consent; refusal to marry after a consensual relationship does not constitute a crime under IPC.
Consent in sexual relationships must be evaluated in the context of the relationship's nature, and a mere allegation of a false promise of marriage does not suffice to establish a case of rape withou....
(1) Accused can be convicted for rape only if court reaches conclusion that intention of accused was mala fide and that he had clandestine motives.(2) Discharge from criminal case – While dealing wit....
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
