'Dishonest Inducement Must Be Clearly Proven In Consensual Relationships': Calcutta High Court Quashes Rape Case Against Man By Ex-Partner
The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings, including charges of rape on false promise of marriage, cheating and offences under the Information Technology Act, against a man accused by his former partner after she got married to another person.Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta allowed a plea filed by petitioner Tasaul Sk seeking quashing of Sessions Case No. 49/2021 arising out of...
The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings, including charges of rape on false promise of marriage, cheating and offences under the Information Technology Act, against a man accused by his former partner after she got married to another person.
Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta allowed a plea filed by petitioner Tasaul Sk seeking quashing of Sessions Case No. 49/2021 arising out of Birbhum Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 03/2021 registered under Sections 376/417 IPC and Section 66 of the IT Act.
The Court set aside the trial court's 16 May 2023 order framing charges under Sections 376/417 IPC and Sections 66A(a),(b) and 66E IT Act.
After examining the FIR, case diary and charge sheet, the bench held that the allegations pertained to a consensual long-term relationship which ended when the woman married another man.
The Court underscored that Section 376 IPC—rape on false promise of marriage—requires material showing that the accused never intended marriage from the inception.
“There is no allegation that at the inception of the relationship, the petitioner deceitfully induced the opposite party no. 2 into intimacy on the basis of a fabricated assurance of marriage,” the Court noted.
Justice Gupta observed that differences arose only later when the question of marriage surfaced and that the woman was mature, educated and aware of the nature of the relationship.
Regarding Section 417 IPC (cheating), the Court held: “In consensual romantic relationships, the element of dishonest inducement must be clearly established. The material on record, even if accepted at face value, does not prima facie make out an offence.”
The Court also set aside the charge under Section 66A of the IT Act, recalling that the provision was struck down in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India.
“Therefore, the charge framed under Sections 66A(a) and 66A(b) is ex facie illegal,” the Court observed.
On Section 66E (privacy), the judge held that the apprehension of disclosure of personal photos was insufficient without any act of publication or transmission: “There is nothing on record to suggest that the private image of the opposite party no. 2 had been disseminated by the petitioner.”
The Court noted serious procedural lapses, holding that statements of the complainant were not recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC, no independent material corroborated allegations, and charges appeared based solely on seizure of electronic devices.
In strongly-worded observations on misuse of criminal law in failed relationships, the Court cautioned:
“When a complaint arises or lodges after the complainant has entered a new marital relationship… the Court must cautiously examine whether the criminal process is being invoked to settle personal scores.”
Calling the continuation of proceedings an “abuse of the criminal justice system”, the Court quashed the entire proceedings against the petitioner.
Case Number: C.R.R. 2783 of 2024
Case: Tasaul Sk Versus The State of West Bengal & Another