Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MADAN PAL SINGH
Kapil Som – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MADAN PAL SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned A.G.A. for the State. Despite the fact that notice has been served as per the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, no one appeared for opposite party no.2.
2. By means of the present criminal appeal under Section 14A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the appellants have prayed for quashing of the order dated 5th July, 2025 passed by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Moradabad in Special Sessions Trial No. 1283 of 2025 (State Vs. Kapil Som & Another) arising out of Case Crime No. 29 of 2025, under Sections 352, 351 (2) 69 B.N.S. and Sections 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (s) and Section 3 (2) (v) of SC/ST Act Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Moradabad as well as further proceedings of above mentioned criminal case.
3. Brief facts are that a first information report has been lodged by opposite party no.2 (prosecutrix herein) against the appellants along with four named persons on 1st May, 2025 at 18:35 hrs. which has been registered as Case Crime No. 29 of 2025, under Sections 352, 351 (2) 69 B.N.S. and Sections 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (s) and Sectio
Establishing criminal liability for rape based on a false promise of marriage requires evidence of original intent to deceive; an absence of such intent invalidates claims of rape under IPC.
Consensual sexual relationships do not constitute rape even if they are based on a promise of marriage that was not fulfilled, unless there is evidence of fraudulent intent.
Section 375 of IPC states that a man is said to commit rape if he has had any form of sexual intercourse without consent of a woman.
Rape - Conviction confirmed and Bail rejected - Accused who gave promise to prosecutrix to marry, did not have any intention to marry and prosecutrix gave consent for sexual intercourse on such an a....
Consent given under a misconception of fact does not constitute valid consent; a prolonged consensual relationship negates claims of forceful sexual relations.
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
