'Consensual Relationship Turned Sour': Madras High Court Acquits Man Convicted For Committing Rape On False Promise Of Marriage

The Madras High Court has recently quashed a case against a 26-year-old man who was convicted and sentenced for allegedly raping his partner on a false promise to marry. Relying upon the Supreme Court's decision in Mahesh Damu Khare v. The State of Maharastra & Another, Justice Sunder Mohan observed that the present case appeared to be one where a consensual relationship that prolonged for a long time had turned sour. “The evidence only reveals a consensual relationship for a prolonged period of time that turned sour and hence, the offence under Sections 376 and 417 of the IPC, are not made out on the facts of the case. It is also to be noted that the trial Court has disbelieved the prosecution version with regard to the offence under Sections 294(b) and 352 of the IPC. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the appellant cannot be convicted on the basis of such evidence,” the court said. The court also noted that the victim's statement revealed that the couple's physical relationship was not merely due to the alleged promise to marry and that the couple shared a good relationship. The court also noted that the victim was aged 24 years at the time of the alleged occurrence and was aware of the consequences of her actions. The court also added that the victim was neither naïve nor gullible. “The victim was aged 24 years at the time of occurrence and she was aware of the consequences of her act and it cannot be said that her consent to have sexual intercourse is only on the false promise of marriage. The victim is not naive or gullible and she was capable of understanding the consequences of her acts,” the court observed. The court was dealing with a criminal appeal filed by Ameen Batch who was convicted by the sessions court in 2022 for offences under IPC Sections 376 (rape) read with 90 (Consent known to be given under fear or misconception) and Section 417 (punishment for cheating) and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs. 25,000. The prosecution case was that the appellant and the victim had a love affair for 6 years and when the victim told the appellant that their marriage was not possible since they belonged to different religions, the appellant threatened the victim that he would commit suicide and had sexual intercourse with her on a false promise of marriage. Based on the complaint of the victim on July 2020, a case was registered. The case was taken up on file and charges were framed for offences under Sections 417, 376, 294(b) and 352 of the IPC. The appellant submitted that the complaint was lodged 25 months after the alleged occurrence and that the allegations of cheating and rape were an afterthought. It was submitted that the evidence of the victim itself would suggest that the relationship was consensual. The State on the other hand defended the conviction order and argued that though there was a delay in filing the complaint, the evidence of the victim was cogent and convincing and thus, the judgment could not be faulted. Though the court agreed that victim cannot be disbelieved merely due to delay in lodging the complaint, the court noted that in the present case, the appellant and the victim had several financial transactions between them and shared good relationship. The court noted that the appellant had even helped the victim to retrieve her gold chain which was pledged. Thus, the court noted that the relationship between the appellant and victim and not merely due to false promise of marriage. The court also noted that the evidence of other witnesses could only establish that the appellant and the victim had close relationship but could not establish the alleged false promise or that the consent was obtained on the alleged false promise. Thus, the court was inclined to allow the criminal appeal and set aside the order of the Sessions Court. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. R. John Sathyan, Sr. Counsel for Mr. Swamisubramanian Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. C. E. Pratap Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Case Title: Ameen Batcha v The State Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 24 Case No: Crl.A.No.73 of 2023Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment

'Consensual Relationship Turned Sour': Madras High Court Acquits Man Convicted For Committing Rape On False Promise Of Marriage

Upasana Sajeev

Tags