Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
HON'BLE RAHUL CHATURVEDI, HON'BLE MS. NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, JJ.
Informant/Victim - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 4849 of 2024
Decided On : 30-05-2024
SC/ST Act - Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 14(A)(1), Section 372 Cr.P.C., Section 323, 504, 506, 376 IPC, Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act - The court analyzed the provisions of the SC/ST Act and IPC, particularly focusing on the definitions of consent and the implications of false promises of marriage. It emphasized that consent obtained under a misconception of fact is not valid, and the relationship's consensual nature over five years undermined the prosecutrix's claims. The court concluded that the trial court's acquittal was justified based on the evidence presented.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant challenged the acquittal of Madan Yadav, who was charged under various sections of the IPC and the SC/ST Act for allegedly raping and abusing the prosecutrix, a member of a Scheduled Caste. The prosecutrix claimed that Yadav had promised to marry her but later denied the promise and abused her based on her caste. The defense argued that the relationship was consensual and that the prosecutrix had concealed her caste.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the relationship between the prosecutrix and the accused was consensual and lasted for several years without any objection. The court noted the absence of medical evidence to support the allegations of rape and concluded that the prosecutrix's consent was not obtained under coercion or misconception, as she had willingly engaged in the relationship.
Issues: Whether the consent given by the prosecutrix was valid or obtained under a misconception of fact, and whether the trial court's acquittal of the accused was justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that consent given under a misconception of fact is not valid under Section 90 of the IPC. It emphasized that the long duration of the relationship and the absence of any immediate complaint or medical evidence undermined the prosecutrix's claims. The court also distinguished between false promises and breaches of promise, asserting that the evidence did not support the claim of rape.
Final Decision: The appeal was rejected, affirming the trial court's acquittal of the accused due to lack of merit in the prosecutrix's claims and the sound reasoning of the trial court.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Ashutosh Mishra, Sri Kripa Kant Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant and Learned AGA for the State.
2. The instant appeal is under Section 14(A)(1) of the SC/ST Act 1989 read with Section 372 Cr.P.C. spear headed against Judgement and Order of acquittal dated 08.02.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, SC/ST Act, Court No.14, Prayagraj, whereby learned Sessions Judge while deciding SST No. 15(706) of 2020 (State Vs. Madan Yadav) arising out of Case Crime No. 1008 of 2019 under Section 323, 504, 506 and 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Colonelganj, District Prayagraj have convicted Madan Yadav only under Section 323 IPC and awarding six months S.I. and Rs. 1000/-fine only acquitting him from all the serious charges under Section 376, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act.
3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Judgement and Order the prosecutrix/victim of Case Crime No. 1008 of 2019 is proposing to invoke the powers of this Court under Section 372 Cr.P.C. read with Section 14(A)(1) of SC/ST Act, with the following prayer:-
And/or pass such other and further order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.”
4. We have heard Sri Ashutosh Mishra and Sri Kripa Kant Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant to their satisfaction and learned AGA for the State and perused the impugned Judgement and Order.
5. After hearing learned counsel the appellant on the admission, we are proposing to decide the appeal at this stage itself.
6. Before coming to the merit of the case, it is imperative to give a bare skeleton facts of the case, so as to appreciate the controversy in its correct perspective.
7. The accused-respondent Madan Yadav is a charge sheeted accused under Section 323, 504, 506 and 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act.
8. Vide Ext. (Ka-1) an application was given by the Prosecutrix to SSP, Prayagraj, that during her educational days, she met with Madan Yadav in the year 2014. On the pretext of helping her in her studies and providing notes etc. they developed certain amount of intimacy. During passage of time, this relationship have crossed all the limits of decency and they got involve in pre-marital sex with each other. Not only this, for the purposes of helping her studies, the accused often call her to ‘Yadav lodge’, Laxmi Chauraha, Allahabad for 2-3 days and thereafter leave her. As per prosecution story, during this time he has extended promise that he would marry her. Meanwhile, for the purposes of education, she left to Lucknow, and has taken admission in some other University. Even then, Madan Yadav came to Lucknow and called her to ‘Nayan Atithigrih’ and ‘Hotel Katiyar International’ near PGI, Lucknow and have a sex with her. In the year 2018, Madan Yadav got a service in C.M.P. Degree College, Allahabad. Thereafter, there was a change in his behaviour and attitude qua her. On 17.10.2019, when she reached to C.M.P. Deg
Consent obtained under a false promise of marriage does not constitute valid consent if the relationship is consensual and prolonged, and the absence of medical evidence significantly undermines alle....
Misconception of fact – There is no straitjacket formula for determining whether consent given by prosecutrix to sexual intercourse is voluntary or whether it is given under misconception of fact – T....
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.
Prolonged consensual relationships undermine claims of rape under false promises, indicating that consent may not be vitiated by misconception of fact.
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
