Point of Law: The promise of marriage must have been a false promise, given in bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was given. The false promise itself must be of immediate relevance, or bear a direct nexus to the woman-s decision to engage in the sexual act.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., to set aside the judgment passed against the appellant on 17.03.2017 in S.C.No.183 of 2013 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram (fast Track Court), Villupuram and acquit the appellant for the charges.)

On a complaint given by one Mahimai Arockiya Mary, daughter of Arockiya Dass, the respondent police registered case in Crime No.685 of 2011 under Sections 417, 376 IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prevention of Women Harassment Act against Mariyalio Amuthan (appellant herein) and 5 others.

2. On completion of investigation, the respondent police filed final report. On the material relied on by the prosecution, the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Villupuram framed the following Charges:

Charge 1: ( Against A-1)

A-1 (Mariyalio Amuthan), on the false promise to marry the defacto complainant, had sexual intercourse with her on 14//12/2011. Thereafter, he refused to marry her. Thereby, deceived her, which is an act punishable under Section 417 of IPC.

Charge -2: ( Against A-1)

A-1, in continuation of the above charge, by committing intercourse with the defacto complainant by force, had committed offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC.

Charge -3: ( Against A-1 to A-6)

In continuation of the above incident, on 14/12/2011 at about 7.00 p.m, when the defacto complainant and her mother came to the house of A-1 to seek redressal, A-1 to A-6 threatened to burn the defacto complainant and her mother alive pouring kerosene and kill them, thereby committed offence punishable under Section 506 (2) IPC.

Charge -4: (A-2 to A-6)

In continuation of the above incident, A-2 to A-6 without provocation assaulted the defacto complainant and her mother with wooden logs and hands, thereby committed offence punishable under Section 352 IPC.

Charge -5: ( A-1 to A-6)

On the date and time mentioned above, A-1 to A-6 caused cruelty to the defacto complainant , thereby committed offence punishable under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prevention of Women Harassment Act.

3. To substantiate the above charges, the prosecution examined 16 witnesses. Marked 16 documents and one material object. The third accused (father of the first accused) had mounted the witness box and examined as DW-1.

4. The trial Court held that the first charge against the first accused for the offence under Section 417 IPC alone proved. The rest of the charges 2 to 5 held not proved. In the result, A-1 was sentenced to undergo one year Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default ,3 months Rigorous Imprisonment. A-2 to A-6 were acquitted of all charges.

5. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the instant Criminal Appeal is filed.

6. The case of the prosecution as spoken by PW-1[defacto complainant-Mahimai Arockia Mary] is that she and the first accused belongs to same village. The first accused is related to her cousin’s husband. She used to meet him while attending the Church. During in the month of September, 2003, the first accused proposed his love to her. On 9th September, 2003, she accepted his proposal. When their love came to the knowledge of the second accused, who is the mother of the first accused, the matter was mediated by Fr.John Edison. The first accused agreed to marry her and gave a written undertaking(Ex.P-1). The first accused assured to marry her after completion of her studies. After completion of her 12th Standard in the year 2008, she joined B.A. and the first accused got job in Indian Army. When he came on leave after training, she gave money to A-1, since he told her that he is yet to receive his salary. She transferred Rs.8000/- to his bank account. The first accused used to take her to Vellangani Temple frequently. Once when she and the first accused went to Vellangani along with her friends, her friends alone returned home. She and the first accused stayed back in Vellangani booked room in a hotel. A-1 forcible raped her and when she objected, he pr