To constitute an offence under Section 493 IPC, it must be established that the accused deceitfully induced the woman to believe she was already lawfully married to him, rather than merely promising to marry her in the future.

JUDGMENT :

PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard the arguments advanced by Mr. Shashikant Ojha, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Gautam Rakesh, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.

2. Instant criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 04.04.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Gumla in Sessions Trial Case No. 306 of 2006, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty for the offence under Section 493 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (R.I.) for three years along with fine of Rs.5000/-.

3. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal as emerging from the written report of the victim dated 10.06.2006 is that the accused Nutan Bage on the false assurance and promise of marriage, established physical relationship with the victim in the month of June 2004 and continued to subject her to sexual intercourse on such inducement for about two years. It is alleged that as a consequence thereof, the victim became pregnant and ultimately gave birth to a female child on 07.04.2006. The prosecutrix asserting the accused to be the father of the child, born out of the said relationship. It further transpires that repeated village panchayats were convened on 04.03.2006, 15.03.2006 and 27.03.2006 with a view to settle the dispute, but the accused failed to appear therein. In such circumstances, the victim alleged that the accused had deceitfully established physical relations with her under the pretext of marriage and thereby committed the offence alleged against him.

On the basis of above written report of the informant, Basia P.S. Case No. 62 of 2006 was registered for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused appellant.

4. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused appellant for the aforesaid offence. Accordingly, cognizance was taken and subsequently, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where Sessions Trial Case No. 306 of 2006 was registered. Charge was framed against accused appellant under Section 376 of the I.P.C. on 02.02.2007 which was read over and explained to him, to which he denied and claimed to be tried.

5. In the course of trial, altogether six witnesses were examined and several documentary evidence were also adduced by the prosecution.

6. On the other hand, no oral or documentary evidence has been adduced by the defence.

7. After conclusion of trial, impugned judgment and order has been passed which has been assailed in this appeal.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was charged for the offence under Section 376 of the I.P.C. while the learned Trial Court after evaluating the evidence of the victim as well as other materials available on record acquitted the appellant from the aforesaid charge but has convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offence under Section 493 of the I.P.C. It is further submitted that no ingredient of offence under Section 493 of the I.P.C. is attracted in this case. Therefore, conviction and sentence of the appellant suffer from serious error of law. It is further submitted that the victim in her evidence herself admitted that just after lodging the case she got married with another person and she had no complain with the appellant (accused). She has also admitted that she