IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.
Shashank Kumar – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Opposite Party
A.B.A. No. 4739 of 2023
Decided On : 18-08-2023
Indian Penal Code,1860 – Sections 341, 323, 376, 504, 506 & 34 – Offence of Voluntarily Causing Hurt – Rape – Criminal intimidation – Common Intention – Anticipatory bail – Held, It is here pertinent to mention that Indian Penal code does not have any specific Section on making false promise of marriage, courts have often seen such cases and currently dealing with them under Sections of I.P.C. dealing with rape and consent – It appears that petitioner is government employee have no criminal background, there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with prosecuting evidence or witnesses and cooperation in investigation, Court inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner – It is made clear that any expression on merits of case shall not prejudice investigation/trial of case, which are, demonstrated only for purpose of disposal of this bail application – Bail application disposal
ORDER :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Apprehending his arrest in connection with Lalpur P.S. Case No. 255 of 2022 instituted under Sections 341, 323, 376, 504, 506 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved to this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.
3. The factual matrix of the case in a nutshell is that victim girl aged about 22 years has lodged a written report before Lalpur Police Station, Ranchi on 08.12.2022 against the present petitioner who happens to be police Sub-Inspector Posted at Lalpur Police Station. The prosecuterix visited with the petitioner at Lalpur Police Station in connection with a case, thereafter, both used to talk together through telephonic call. The prosecuterix was residing in a girls hostel while pursuing her studies. It is further alleged that the petitioner and prosecuterix used to go outside for visiting some places and also promised to marry her and established sexual intercourse with her. The prosecuterix’s mother was also communicated about their marriage. It is further alleged that on 20th November, 2022 present petitioner solemnized marriage with the prosecuterix in a temple situated at Lalpur Police Station when she informed about her pregnancy. Thereafter, present petitioner left her at hostel saying that his parents did not agree to recognize this marriage due to different caste. On 3rd December, 2022, petitioner settled his marriage with one girl, namely, Neha. Prosecuterix protested the said marriage and also went to the house of the petitioner, but she was condemned unheard and was threatened. She also went to the room of the petitioner for taking back some of her commodities and also attempted to talk with him but her phone number was blocked.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that allegation against the petitioner about commission of rape on false promise of marriage is out and out not tenable. The contents of FIR and the statement of victim girl depicts in clear terms that petitioner has solemnized marriage with the informant at Lalpur in a temple situated at Police Station. There is no allegation that at any point of time the petitioner has committed forcible sexual intercourse with the victim, who happens to be the major educated lady. The FIR further fortifies that the marriage could not be recognized by family members for which petitioner cannot be blamed. It is further submitted that the prosecuterix on earlier occasion also had instituted Mahila P.S. Case No. 28 of 2017 dated 03.09.2017 registered for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4 and 6 POCSO Act and Section 67/67A of the IT Act against some known accused persons, wherein the victim and her family members have turned hostile and resultantly accused persons were acquitted from the charges vide judgment dated 13.08.2019. It is alleged by witnesses during investigation that huge amount was realized by the informant/prosecuterix of this case in that case. It is further submitted that no specific date, time, place and year about commission rape with the prosecutrix has been mentioned in the FIR or in her statement recorded during investigation of the case, rather, in her counter affidavit victim has filed some photographs with the petitioner in compromising position and also putting vermillion on her forehead. She has also relied upon annexure A submission of report by Incharge Mahila Apradh Anusandhan Vibhag, addressed to Director General Crime Investigation Department Jharkhand Ranchi about enquiry in connection with fair investigation of this case which clearly shows that since two years ago petitioner and prosecuterix were in visiting terms and even after lodging this FIR. On 21.02.2023 the prosecuterix along with petitioner went to Maa Residency Hotel Bariyatu, Ranchi booked a room no. 505 and stayed tog
The legal principle established is that consent must involve active and reasoned deliberation, and false promises of marriage must be given in bad faith with no intention of being adhered to at the t....
(1) Misconception of fact – Failure to keep promise on a future uncertain date does not always amount to misconception of fact at inception of act itself.(2) Law holding that false promise to marriag....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that consent obtained on a false promise to marry is not a valid consent, and the validity of such consent must be determined based on the immediat....
A false promise of marriage, made in bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was given, could vitiate the consent of the woman.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of the victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the distinction between rape and consensual sex based on false promises, and th....
The legal point established is that a false promise leading to sexual intercourse and breach of promise can constitute a prima facie case of kidnap, rape, and cheating under the Indian Penal Code.
A married person cannot induce another married person into a physical relationship on a false promise of marriage.
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.