Back
2014 Supreme(Tri) 77
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
Deepak Gupta, CJ.
Md. Abdul Mutlib - Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura - Respondent
Crl. Rev. P. 51 of 2005
Decided On : 13-02-2014
For the Appellant :Mr. A.C. Bhowmik, Sr. Advocate and Mr. P. Saha, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. R.C. Debnath, Addl. P.P.
Once a marriage has taken place, there is no question of any cheating under section 417 of the IPC.
Headnote:
Cheating - Criminal Law - The court acquitted the accused of the offence of cheating under section 417 of the Indian Penal Code, as the prosecutrix's allegations were found to be unreliable and contradictory, and the court held that once the marriage had taken place, there was no question of any cheating.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecutrix alleged that the accused, after promising to marry her, had sexual intercourse with her without her consent. She also alleged that she was compelled by her husband to file a false case against another person and was subsequently driven out of her house by the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations of cheating were not substantiated, as the prosecutrix had engaged in sexual intercourse with the accused on multiple occasions, and the marriage between them had taken place. The court also questioned the reliability of the prosecutrix's statements, given her involvement in filing a false complaint of rape against another person.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused had committed the offence of cheating under section 417 of the IPC, based on the prosecutrix's allegations and the subsequent events.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that once the marriage had taken place between the accused and the prosecutrix, there was no basis for the offence of cheating. The court also emphasized the unreliability of the prosecutrix's statements, particularly her involvement in filing a false complaint of rape against another person.
Final Decision: The revision petition was allowed, the judgments of the trial courts were set aside, and the accused was acquitted.
JUDGMENT
Deepak Gupta, C.J.:-This criminal revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 16-03-2005 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar in Criminal Appeal No. 1(1) of 2005 whereby he dismissed the appeal filed by the present petitioner and upheld the judgment of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dharmanagar, North Tripura in G.R. 428 of 2003 convicting the accused-petitioner of having committed an offence punishable under section 417 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1(one) year for commission of offence punishable under section 417 of IPC and also to pay fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further simple imprisonment for 2(two) months. Normally, this Court is very reluctant to interfere in exercise of its revisionary or extraordinary jurisdiction in matters related to pure finding of fact. However, if such finding of fact is based on no evidence or is such which no prudent person can arrive at, then the Court would be failing in its duty if it did not interfere.
2. The allegations in the complaint are that the prosecutrix used to live with her maternal uncle since her father had died. The accused used to live in a house close to the house of her maternal uncle. The accused started visiting her house and proposed to marry the prosecutrix. She agreed to do so if the marriage was performed in accordance with social rites. Thereafter, the accused allegedly raped the prosecutrix and had sexual intercourse with her without her consent. She threatened to inform her relatives about this, but the accused requested her not to disclose these facts to her other family members. Thereafter, he had sexual intercourse with her on many other occasions. Lastly, she and the accused were caught committing sexual intercourse by her maternal uncle when she was slapped by her maternal uncle. The accused prayed for mercy and agreed to marry the prosecutrix. He actually married the prosecutrix and a male child was also born.
3. The prosecutrix alleges that thereafter her husband forced her to file a false complaint against one Matab Uddin alleging that Matab Uddin had raped her and he was the father of the boy. The prosecutrix alleges that she was cheated by the accused. Both the Courts below have convicted the accused and sentenced him to undergo 1(one) year rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 3,000/-.
4. Cheating is defined under section 415 of the IPC as follows:--
Cheating.--Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to "cheat".
5. The allegation of the prosecutrix is that she was cheated by the accused who promised to marry her if she had sexual intercourse with him. However, she in her statement admits that after the sexual intercourse took place and both were caught red handed, a marriage did take place between her and the accused Abdul Mutlib. Thereafter, relations between them may have soured and the accused may have tortured her, but that does not mean that he committed any offence of cheating. The present case is one of cheating. According to the prosecutrix, she was compelled by her husband to file a false case against Matab Uddin on 02-11-2003 and she also gave a statement on oath against the said person on 04-11-2003. Thereafter, she was driven out of her house by the accused.
6. I fail to understand how both the Courts below have convicted the accused. No case of rape is made out. Even if the statement of the prosecutrix is taken as the gospel truth, she indulged in sexual interc
