Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Anurag Ravindra Umaley, filed a revision application under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) challenging the order dated 28/07/2016 passed by the trial court rejecting his application for discharge under Section 227 Cr.P.C. The complainant had lodged an FIR under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) alleging that the applicant had raped her and threatened to kill her. The brief facts are that the complainant and applicant met in 2011 when both were working in Pune. They exchanged mobile numbers and the applicant proposed a love relationship, which the complainant initially hesitated but later accepted. On 08/09/2011, the applicant visited the complainant's house and they had a physical relationship. The complainant alleged that the applicant promised to marry her but later refused, and that he threatened to kill her if she disclosed the relationship. The applicant contended that the relationship was consensual and that no prima facie case for rape was made out. The court analyzed the material on record, including the FIR and charge sheet, and found that the complainant's own version indicated a consensual love affair and that the promise to marry was not false from the inception. The court held that the ingredients of Section 376 IPC were not satisfied as the consent was not vitiated by a false promise. The court also found no prima facie case under Section 506 IPC. Consequently, the court allowed the revision application, set aside the trial court's order, and discharged the applicant from all charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Discharge - Section 227 Cr.P.C. - Prima Facie Case - The court must consider whether the material on record, if unrebutted, would lead to conviction; if not, discharge is warranted. Held that the trial court's rejection of discharge was erroneous as the allegations indicated a consensual relationship and not rape (Paras 1-10). B) Indian Penal Code - Rape - Section 376 IPC - Consensual Relationship - A promise to marry which is broken does not vitiate consent unless the promise was false from the inception. Held that the complainant's own version showed a love affair and consensual physical relationship, and the applicant did not commit rape (Paras 5-10). C) Indian Penal Code - Criminal Intimidation - Section 506 IPC - Absence of Threat - The allegation of threat to kill was vague and not supported by material. Held that no prima facie case under Section 506 IPC was made out (Para 10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the discharge application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. when the allegations in the FIR and charge sheet do not prima facie disclose the ingredients of the offence of rape under Section 376 IPC.
Final Decision
The revision application is allowed. The order dated 28/07/2016 passed by the trial court rejecting the discharge application is set aside. The applicant is discharged from the offences under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
Law Points
- Discharge under Section 227 Cr.P.C.
- Prima facie case
- Consensual relationship
- Rape
- Section 376 IPC
- Section 506 IPC
- False promise of marriage
- Breach of promise
