Back
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, VIJU ABRAHAM
Shahul Ameer S/o. Musthafa – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.
The appellant is the accused in S.C. No. 541 of 2016 on the file of the Special Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Manjeri. In the said case, he faced indictment for having committed offences punishable under Sections 363 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. By the impugned judgment, he was found guilty and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and ordered to pay a fine of ?10,000/-, in default of which, he was to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 366 of the IPC . He was also sentenced to imprisonment for life and directed to pay a fine of ?10,000/-, in default of which, he was to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the IPC r/w. Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. The prosecutrix, a 25-year-old woman, belongs to a Scheduled Caste community. She had completed her Hotel Managem
Consent for sexual intercourse is vitiated by misconception of fact, but mutual consent in a relationship does not constitute rape without evidence of malicious intent.
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....
Consent in sexual relationships must be scrutinized for deception linked to promises of marriage; a mere breach does not equate to coercion or rape.
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 distinction between consensual relations and rape lies in the perception and intention behind consent; the breach of a promise to marry does not equate to misconception if the relationship is con....
Prolonged consensual relationships undermine claims of rape under false promises, indicating that consent may not be vitiated by misconception of fact.
Consent obtained under a false promise of marriage is invalid, constituting cheating under Section 417 of IPC.
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
