Back
2019 Supreme(Gau) 453
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN, J.
Bankim Hajong and others - Appellants
Versus
State of Assam and others - Respondents
Crl. Appeal No. 245 of 2014
Decided On : 09-04-2019
For the Appellant : Mr. H. Das.
For the Respondent: Mr. A.K. Hussain, Mr. D. Das, Addl. PP.
False promises leading to a consensual physical relationship can constitute an offense under IPC Section 417 for making false assurances and deceiving the victim.
Headnote:
False Promise - Conviction under IPC Section 417 - IPC Section 417 - Summary: The court discussed the evidence of the victim, her parents, and the medical officer to establish that the accused made false promises to marry the victim, leading to a consensual physical relationship. The court found the accused guilty under IPC Section 417 for making false assurances and deceiving the victim, ultimately converting the sentence to a fine to redress the grievances of the victim and her child.
Fact of the Case:
The victim had a consensual physical relationship with the accused based on his false promise to marry her. The accused refused to marry her, leading to the victim filing a complaint.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty under IPC Section 417 for making false assurances and deceiving the victim, ultimately converting the sentence to a fine to redress the grievances of the victim and her child.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused's false promise to marry the victim constituted an offense under IPC Section 417.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the accused's false promise to marry the victim, leading to a consensual physical relationship, constituted an offense under IPC Section 417 for making false assurances and deceiving the victim.
Final Decision: The accused was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 50,000 under IPC Section 417, with the amount to be given to the victim. The District Legal Service Authority was directed to provide adequate compensation to the victim and her child.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. H. Das, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. A K Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2. Also heard Mr. D Das, learned Addl. PP, Assam.
2. Present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order passed by the learned Addl. Sessions judge, Goalpara in Sessions Case No. 311/12 u/s 417 IPC whereby the accused/appellant has been convicted u/s 417 of IPC and sentenced him to RI for 1 (one) year and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- and in default paying fine, RI for 3 months.
3. The prosecution case in brief is that the victim girl (PW-1) (name withheld) had love and affairs with the accused person and accused with an assurance to marry her, cohabited with her for several times. As a result of which, she became pregnant. The accused tried to cause miscarriage on being informed about the pregnancy of the victim. But she was not married as assured by the accused person. Later on, she came to know that he is a married person. Matter was informed to the village headmen and village mel asked the accused person to take the victim to his house and accordingly she was taken to his house where she resided for 3 (three) months. But as no proper accommodation was provided to her and she was not given social status as a wife, she returned to her own house and filed the ejahar before Lakhipur PS on 15.05.2011.
4. On the basis of the FIR, Lakhipur PS case No. 200/2011 u/s 417/376/323/344 IPC was registered and after due investigation of the matter charge-sheet was submitted against the accused person u/s 417/376/493 of IPC.
5. The accused person faced the trial and denied the charge that was framed by the Addl. Sessions Judge u/s 417/376/493 of IPC. During the course of trial, prosecution examined 6 (six) witnesses in support of the case and defence examined none. Plea of defence is total denial. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Court held the accused guilty u/s 417 of IPC and convicted and sentenced him as aforesaid.
6. Assailing the aforesaid judgment and order, present appeal has been preferred on the ground that the learned Court has failed to appreciate the evidence in proper perspective of law and facts. It is contended that despite having no appropriate evidence on record conviction of the accused, resulted miscarriage of justice.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant has pressed all the grounds that has been narrated in the appeal memo to submit that in view of consensual physical relation between the parties, the order of conviction and sentence is not sustainable. On the other hand, according to the learned Addl. PP, there is no infirmity in the aforesaid judgment and order rendered by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Goalpara.
8. Learned counsel for the informant has urged before this Court that the conviction and sentence of the accused cannot be interfered into as the learned trial Court has rightly come to a conclusion on the basis of their evidence on record. It has also been contended that because of conduct of the accused/appellant, life of the victim has been ruined as she has not been given status of wife of accused in society. It is stated that victim has to now to maintain his child, born out of their relationship between the parties and she is in hardship to maintain her child.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant relying on a decision of 2016 (2) GLT 1012 Bhaiti Ali (MD.) Vs. State of Assam, it has been contended that the appellant is a young man and has no earlier criminal antecedent, so, the case of appellant, may also be considered as has been decided in the aforesaid case wherein this Court has considering the age, antecedent and other facts and circumstances of the case, converted the sentence to a fine only to be paid to the victim. Similar consideration may be extended to the present appellant also as he is a young man, having children, and no earlier criminal antecedent.
10. I have heard the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and the mat
