Back
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Kumud Das, S/o. Sita Ram Das – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Arun Dev Choudhury, J.)
1. Heard Mr. K. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent No.1. None appears for the informant/respondent No.2, though the name of the counsel representing her before this Court has been reflected in the cause list.
2. The present Criminal Revision Petition under Sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is filed assailing the judgment and sentence dated 18.08.2010 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S), Barpeta in connection with GR Case No. 1310/1999, whereby the present petitioner/accused was convicted under Section 417 IPC and was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) for 6 (six) months and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- (three thousand only) and in default of payment of fine, to undergo Simple Imprisonment (SI) for 20 (twenty) days.
3. The further challenge is made against the appellate judgment and order dated 24.01.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Barpeta, Assam in Criminal Appeal Case No. 21/2010, whereby the judgment and sentence dated 18.08.2010 passed by the learned Sub-Divisi
Consent in a love relationship cannot be deemed vitiated unless proven that it was based on a false promise made in bad faith, and mere refusal to marry does not constitute cheating under Section 417....
A long-term consensual relationship does not constitute cheating under Section 417 IPC unless deception or misconception of fact is proven.
Conviction under Section 417 IPC requires proof of a fraudulent promise to marry which was false from the inception; mere failure to marry does not constitute deception in consensual relationships.
Promise to marry does not negate consent given out of love; misleading promises alone do not constitute misconception of fact for statutory cheating.
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.
Refusal to marry after a consensual relationship does not constitute cheating under Section 417 IPC without evidence of fraudulent intent at the time of the promise.
A false promise of marriage, given in bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was given, would constitute a misconception of fact vitiating the woman's consent.
Consent obtained through a promise of marriage does not constitute a misconception of fact unless it is proven to be made with deceitful intent. Acquittal is warranted when victim's autonomy and impl....
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
