Introduction:

In a recent judgment, the Bombay High Court discharged an accused in a rape case, noting that the offense was not established as the accused had genuinely intended to marry the complainant but faced parental disapproval beyond his control. Justice MW Chandwani of the Nagpur Bench emphasized that the accused’s willingness to marry the complainant was evident, and the breach of promise was due to unforeseen circumstances. The court quashed the charges under Sections 376(2)(n) and 417 of the IPC, shedding light on the complexity of consent and false promises in relationships.

Arguments:

The complainant, represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, contended that the accused obtained consent under a false promise of marriage and had no intention to fulfill it. The defense, led by Advocate J.M. Gandhi, argued that the physical relations were consensual and rooted in a love affair. WhatsApp chats were presented as evidence supporting the defense’s contention. The accused’s plea for discharge was rejected by the Sessions Court, leading to the High Court appeal.

Court’s Judgement:

Justice Chandwani delved into the evolving relationship between the 33-year-old complainant and the accused, emphasizing its initial friendly nature before developing into a love affair. The court scrutinized numerous instances of physical intimacy outlined in the charge-sheet and distinguished between a false promise and a breach of promise to marry. It acknowledged the complainant’s consciousness of consequences during the encounters and cited apex court judgments to highlight the necessity of evidence demonstrating the accused’s lack of intent to marry from the beginning. The court concluded that the case fell within the guidelines for quashing proceedings, as established in the State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal case.