2024 Supreme(P&H) 1158
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SUMEET GOEL, J.
Sanjay Kumar Sharma – Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & Anr. – Respondents
CRR-1844 of 2022
Decided On : 26-06-2024
Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Munish Kumar Garg, Advocate with Ms. Bhawna Thakur and Mr. Tanuj Goyal Tohana, Advocates; For the Petitioner
Ms. Mahima Yashpal, DAG, Haryana.
Ms. Ritu Singh Mann, Advocate and Mr. Jannat Singh Mann, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
Consent obtained under a false promise to marry does not constitute valid consent for sexual acts; the court must evaluate the intention behind the promise and the circumstances surrounding the consent.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 227, 228, 239, 240 - Rape - Parameters for framing charges - The court must determine if there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused based on the material presented, without delving into the merits of the case at this stage. (Paras 5, 9, 13)
(B) Consent - Definition and implications - Consent obtained under a false promise to marry may not constitute valid consent for sexual acts; the court must assess the intention behind the promise and the circumstances surrounding the consent. (Paras 11, 12, 13)
Facts of the case:
The accused was charged with rape and other offenses based on a complaint from the victim, who alleged that the accused had sexual relations with her under the pretext of marriage. Both parties were married and had children. The relationship was consensual, and the victim later claimed to have been misled. (Paras 1, 15)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the relationship was consensual and that the victim's allegations did not substantiate the charges of rape or other offenses. The accused was discharged from the charges. (Paras 16)
Issues: The main issues were whether the accused was rightly charged and the parameters for determining consent in cases involving promises of marriage. (Paras 5)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the evidence did not support the claim of rape, as the relationship was consensual and the victim was aware of the accused's marital status. The promise to marry was not substantiated as a misconception of fact. (Paras 13, 15)
Result: Revision petition accepted; the accused discharged from all charges. (Paras 16)
JUDGMENT
Mr. Sumeet Goel, J.
The present revision petition has been filed by the accused challenging the order dated 14.07.2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram, Haryana whereby, he has been arraigned, for facing trial under Sections 323/376(2)(n)/406/506 of IPC.
2. The relevant part of the report filed by the police under Section 173 of Cr.P.C., 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C., 1973), as spelt out in the petition, reads as follows:-
"Respected Sir, the description of the indictment is that a complaint dated 25.05.2021 ZERO FIR No 0001 dt. 27/04/2021 Section 3762N, 323, 406, 506 IPC, was received from the complainant to police station sector-29 Gurugram, Haridas Nagar police station, Khajuri Khas, and police station Sonia Nagar at the police station, Essence of the complaint are as follows "Sir, SHO Sector 29 Gurugram, Haryana 1976P SECTOR 45 RESIDENT I Mrs. Santosh Kumar Shivani live in Gurugram, Haryana I have been living in this house separately from my husband since 2008. I am married and I am self-sufficient. I met sanjay Kumar Sharma s/o Mr. Sheetal Prasad Sharma, resident of Jhansi M.No.418/A New Govind Nagar, Hansari, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, in December 2015 on Facebook. After that, we started talking and then the phone number was exchanged He said, "I love you and want to get married." A few days later Sanjay told that is father is ill and I am coming to Gurugram to meet him. You meet me at the airport and bring two or three pairs of clothes. I reached the airport where I met Sanjay Kumar where he came vey late, from that place we went to Jhaoda officer due to delay, where we reach very late and there they had physical relations with me without my consent After that, the next day, Sanjay Kumar went to Medanta hospital and I came to my house. I told Sanjay on the phone that you didn't do well with me. Then, Sanjay said I will marry you. Right now my father's health is bad. You keep your mouth close sit relax and calm. Now my father's condition is worse. We will get married as soon as my father recovers and I will give divorce to my wife. Sanjay Kumar called me to Dharuheda, where his parents also lived in his younger brother's house, and said that staying here would serve his father. After that, i served his father for about 10 to 12 days. After that, he took his father to Jhansi. In the meantime, Sanjay would marry the same person. There he also had constant physical relations promise to marry me. After that, I came to know that Sanjay Kumar is not divorcing his wife and he is in CRPF 2IC means Second Commanded Officer. I came to know after that when I asked Sanjay for marriage, he got angry with me and also threatened to kill me many times. Meanwhile, in May 2020, Sanjay Kumar's children also complained against him. Then Commandant Sir got an inquiry done, and in the meantime, the convict Sanjay Kumar took advice from many people for interrogation and sent me to Gurugram and said that after all the atmosphere is fine, I will call you back to Jhansi, and after a few days, I came to know that the inquiry against Sanjay Kumar is being conducted he called me back to Jhansi and take my signature on a blank paper, saying that I had taken you in my bank account and a land in which I had transferred two lakh rupees to Sanjay's account, and that I was making you a nominee. They took my three to four signs by saying that I would make a nominee. I later came to know that Sanjay Kumar misused my sign by making me a servant and getting a rent agreement from Jhansi made in my name and told me that I was kept for the service his father and for his own use(sex). Sanjay Kumar misused my sign and pretended to marry me and cheated me. He took my two lakh rupees for the last time in November 2020.I am giving this complaint in front of female advocate Allina SENAPATI. On which the investigation was conducted by the LSI in the research of the prosecution by marking the above, after inspecting the research incident site,
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
