Back
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
MR. PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA, J
PROSANTA BORA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. promised marriage does not invalidate consent unless malicious intent is established. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. genuine affection can influence interpretations of consent; context matters in legal assessments. (Para 12 , 17 , 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)
Heard Mr. N. Barua, learned counsel as well as Mr. S. Das, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.
2. This is an appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order dated 17.01.2012 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jorhat in Sessions Case No.2 of 2006. The appellant was convicted under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of six months.
3. On 21.07.2004, Smt. Rekha Bora has filed a complaint stating that she was in a relationship with Prosanta Bora for more than one year. Prosanta Bora allegedly promised to marry and on that promise, he had physical relationship with her. On 29.06.2004, accompanied by two Mohila Samity members, Prosanta Bora took the complainant to his house and introduced her to be his wife. That day also, she slept with
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
