Man acquitted of raping wife, convicted for kidnapping her

A Delhi court has convicted a man for kidnapping a girl before marrying her but absolved him of the charges of raping her saying she lived with him as his wife for four years before lodging a complaint with the police.

"From the testimony of the prosecutrix (complainant) as well as from her neighbours, it is clear that she is a consenting party to the whole incident," said Additional Sessions Judge
Madhu Jain, while acquitting Delhi resident Manmath of charges of raping his wife.

"Not only she lived with the accused after marriage for four years but did not make any complaint to anybody either prior to making this complaint (to police)," the ASJ added.

The court, however, held him guilty of kidnapping the girl prior to marrying her, saying that at the time of offence in 2006, the girl was less than 18 years of age and the accused himself had admitted to marrying her.

"So far as consent of the girl is concerned (regarding her marriage), consent of minor is no consent in the eyes of law as age of the girl was less than 18 years and therefore, under the provisions of Section 366 (kidnapping) of IPC, prosecution has been fully able to prove its case against the accused under Section 366 of IPC," it said.

Manmath was arrested in August 2010, three months after the police lodged the case of kidnapping and rape against him in May 2010 on the complaint of his wife.

In her complaint, she had stated that on December 14, 2006, when she was returning from work, Manmath along with his two friends had pulled her into an autorickshaw and took her to a nearby temple, where Manmath forcibly married her.

The woman had also alleged that after marrying her forcibly, the accused had brought her to his house, confined her there, raped her without her consent and then started treating her as his wife.

Counsel for the accused, in his defence, had argued that it was a love marriage and the woman was a consenting party to the whole incident.

The counsel had also contended that she had lived with the accused for about four years and a child was also born out of the wedlock, adding that when accused had refused to live separately from his parents, prosecutrix implicated him in the case.

While the court rejected the contentions regarding the marriage, it however observed that "plea of the accused that prosecutrix lodged this complaint against him as he refused to get separated from his parents cannot be disbelieved in view of the fact that the prosecutrix lodged this complaint after four years."