IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
RAJNESH OSWAL, J.
Vikash Singh – Appellant
Versus
UT of J&K Through S.H.O. P/s Khour & Anr. – Respondents
CRM(M) No. 335 of 2021
cided on : 06-06-2024
Rape - FIR Quashing - IPC Section 376 - The court interpreted Section 376 IPC, emphasizing that consent obtained under false promises must be proven as deceitful. The absence of specific allegations and the consensual nature of the relationship led to the quashing of the FIR.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an Air Force Corporal, was accused of rape by the respondent, who claimed he exploited her under false promises of marriage. The petitioner argued that the FIR was vague and based on blackmail attempts by the respondent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations in the FIR lacked specificity and that the relationship was consensual. The respondent's claims of coercion were not substantiated, leading to the conclusion that no offence under Section 376 IPC was made out.
Issues: Whether the FIR under Section 376 IPC was valid given the lack of specific allegations and the nature of the relationship between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that for a charge of rape to stand, it must be established that consent was obtained through deceit, which was not proven in this case.
Result: The FIR under Section 376 IPC was quashed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Impugned in this petition is an FIR bearing No. 33/2021, dated 02.06.2021 under Section 376 IPC registered by respondent No. 1 at the instance of respondent No. 2.
2. The petitioner, who is serving in the Indian Air Force as Corporal and presently posted at 19WG, Guwahati since 07.03.2018, has stated in the petition that the respondent No. 2 met him in the year 2012 through a common friend once or twice and for the last 8 years, he has not seen respondent No. 2 even once, what to say of establishing physical relations with her. The petitioner has claimed that he has never ever tried to contact the respondent No. 2 telephonically as well for all along these 8 years, rather it is the respondent No. 2 who has been trying to establish contact with the petitioner by sending messages from her Mobile No. XXXXXXXXXX. Every time the petitioner blocked the phone number of respondent No. 2, she used to change her number and again start pursuing the petitioner and blackmail him by threatening to implicate him in a false rape case unless the petitioner accepted the demand of the respondent No. 2 for an amount of Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. The petitioner has annexed with the present petition the text and whatsapp messages sent by the respondent No. 2 to him, to demonstrate that the respondent No. 2 has been blackmailing the petitioner to pay Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, give half of his land and half of his salary for the entire period of her life. It is stated by the petitioner that he faced the harassment at the instance of respondent No. 2 only to ensure that his service record remains unblemished but at the same time, the petitioner never succumbed to the blackmailing tactics of the respondent No. 2. It is further stated that the petitioner had come to his home on leave in July/August 2019, when the respondent No. 2 who also lived in the same Village came to his house and created a scene. Due to intervention of the villagers and Sarpanch, the petitioner was saved. The villagers told respondent No. 2 that if she had been wronged, she should lodge a complaint, but she did not choose to do so, as the petitioner had not done any wrong to her. Again, in the year 2020 when the petitioner came to his Village on leave, the respondent No. 2 again tried to blackmail the petitioner on the pretext of filing FIR against him and finally in the year 2021, the impugned FIR was got registered by respondent No. 2 when the petitioner again came to his Village after obtaining the leave.
3. By pleading these facts, the petitioner has sought the quashing of the FIR on the ground that the FIR impugned is vague and the respondent No. 2 has not even cited a single specific event for implicating the petitioner in the commission of offence of rape and even the place of alleged occurrence is also not forthcoming from the FIR impugned. It is also contended by the petitioner that as there was no physical contact with respondent No. 2/complainant so, there was no question of petitioner extending any promise to her, to solemnize marriage and to seek sexual favour under that pretext. It is also urged by the petitioner that the whatsapp messages and text messages from the phone number of respondent No. 2 make it explicitly clear that she has been pursuing her agenda to blackmail the petitioner to extort unjustified money from the petitioner.
4. The status report stands filed by respondent No. 1, wherein it has been stated that on 02.06.2021, the complainant submitted a written complaint with Police Station, Khour to the effect that one person, namely, Vikash Singh Manhas S/o Sham Singh R/o Pangali, Khour has been committing rape upon her for the last 3-4 years on the pretext of marriage. On receipt of this complaint, FIR bearing No. 33/2021 under Section 376 IPC was registered with the Police Station, Khour and the investigation of the case was entrusted to PSI Akhil Sen. The investigation was conducted, and the site plan was prepared. The place of occurrence was an agricultura
Jasmit Singh vs. State of J&K & Ors.' 2021 (6) JKJ 143[HC]
Consent obtained under false promises must be proven as deceitful for a rape charge to be valid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove that the promise of marriage was false, given in bad faith, and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was g....
When there is allegation that sexual relationships were made on the basis of false promise of marriage, then it has to be established that promise of marriage was a false promise, given in bad faith ....
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.
There is clear distinction between rape and consensual sex. If accused has not made promise with sole intention to seduce prosecutrix to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Consent under fear or misconception and the immediate relevance of false promise to marry in establishing the vitiation of consent.
It is necessary to examine FIR, statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. before Judicial Magistrate First Class to find out correct factual matrix of issue - Sum and substance of decis....
A mere breach of promise to marry does not constitute an offence under IPC unless it is shown that the promise was made in bad faith with no intention to adhere to it.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.