SC quashed FIR alleging promise to marry was false at the inception

SC quashed FIR alleging promise to marry was false at the inception

The Apex Court dismissed an FIR, holding allegation of rape, on the ground that accused’s promise to marry was false at the inception forms no allegation to the effect of offence of rape.

In the instant case, the FIR stated that the accused and complainant were in a physical relationship for more than a year. During this period, the complainant had been in constant touch with accused’s family and that they had agreed to her and accused’s marriage.

In the FIR, the complainant alleged that now the accused and his family have refused for the marriage proposal and that her sole grievance revolves around accused not marrying her,

The petitioner in the instant case had approached Allahabad High Court and sought was dismissal of FIR, however, the same was repudiated.

The petitioner then approached the apex court and contended that bare reading of FIR, along with the statements recorded under Section 164 of CrPC would indicate that neither the accused had no intent of marrying the prosecuterix, nor was the promise of marriage false.

The bench, upon reading the FIR, made certain observations. Firstly, the relationship of parties was consensual in nature. Secondly, they had been in a long-term relationship. Lastly, the accused had expressed his denial to marry the complainant which led to the registration of FIR.

The apex court relied upon the ruling in the case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v State of Maharashtra, wherein it was held that in order to determine whether the “consent” of woman was vitiated or not, two propositions must be taken into consideration.

Primarily, the promise to marriage must be accompanied with bad intention to not adhere to it. Secondly, the promise to marry and woman’s decision to engage in sexual act must bear a direct nexus.

The bench, in the instant case, observed that the accused had merely refused to marry the prosecuterix which led to the registration of FIR. The bench, thus allowed the appeal of accused.

1200 675 Shivangi Pandey
Share

Leave a Reply

Shivangi Pandey

Shivangi Pandey

I'm a news analyst at LexForti Legal News.

All stories by : Shivangi Pandey
About Author
Shivangi Pandey

Shivangi Pandey

I'm a news analyst at LexForti Legal News.

Consult
Leave this field blank
CLICK HERE TO VISIT