Supreme Court quashes rape case against man over false promise of marriage

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday quashed a criminal case lodged against a man for committing repeated rape upon a woman on false promise of marriage, holding there was no inducement by the accused before the alleged crime.

A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran said the allegation of forceful intercourse on threat and coercion was also not believable, given the relationship admitted between the parties and the willing and repeated excursions to hotel rooms.

Going by the complaint and the statement by the victim, the court said, the promise, if any, was after the first physical intercourse and even later the allegation was forceful intercourse without any consent.

"In all the three instances, it was the allegation that the intercourse was on threat and coercion and there is no consent spoken of by the victim, in which case there cannot be any inducement found, on a promise held out," the bench said.

Examining a plea by appellant Jothiragawan against refusal of the Madras High Court to entertain his plea under Section 482 CrPC, the bench said, "We are not convinced that the sexual relationship admitted by both the parties was without the consent of the victim. That they were closely related and were in a relationship is admitted by the victim".

The court also pointed out the allegation was also of threat and coercion, to have sexual intercourse, which even as per the victim’s statement was repeated thrice in the same manner, when she willingly accompanied the accused to a hotel room.

"We have absolutely no doubt in our mind that the criminal proceedings initiated against the present appellant are nothing but an abuse of process of the court. This is precisely a case where the High Court should have interfered in exercise of its inherent and extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the CrPC. These proceedings cannot go on," the bench said.

According to the victim, on April 17, 2021, she accompanied the accused to a movie. She felt dizzy and they took a room in a hotel where there was an ‘abrupt and unexpected’ sexual intercourse, under coercion against her wish. However, the accused, by putting his hand on her head, said that he would marry her.

"We do not find any inducement by the accused, with a promise of marriage, before the alleged crime, leading to the sexual intercourse," the bench said.

On the pretext of discussing marriage, the accused again allegedly called the victim and she willingly accompanied him to the very same hotel where they made entries in the register, falsifying their names. The victim claimed she wanted to talk about marriage, but the accused refused to talk about it till they had an intercourse.

"At this stage also, there is no promise of marriage or any inducement thereby and the allegation was that the accused threatened her that he would not marry, if she did not have sexual intercourse with him and then forcibly had such intercourse. These are mutually destructive contentions, since, if there is consent, there cannot be alleged forceful intercourse and it could only be contended that consent was obtained on misrepresentation or coercion," the bench said.

However, after both instances the victim was mentally upset but this did not prevent her from, still again going to the very same hotel at the request of the accused, a third time, the bench noted.

The victim claimed that after the three incidents, the complainant refused to pick up the telephone and when eventually contacted, he refused to solemnise their relationship by a valid marriage.

The High Court refused to quash the criminal proceedings, holding the victim and the accused aged about 22 years, were close relatives and the complaint given by the victim clearly indicated that the accused obtained a forced consent from her by giving a promise to marry her. It also said if the accused had duped the victim to have sexual intercourse with him on the promise of marriage, was a matter of trial, it said.