Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Jagdish Raghunath Mankar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Palghar, in Sessions Case No.256 of 1996 for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs.200/-. He appealed against this conviction under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The prosecution case was that the prosecutrix, who worked at a construction site, befriended the appellant and engaged in sexual relations with him on more than one occasion, believing his promise to marry her. She later discovered he was already married and became pregnant, leading to a complaint in September 1990. The appellant was tried and convicted. The High Court examined the evidence and found inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's testimony. The court noted that the prosecutrix was an adult and had voluntarily engaged in sexual relations over a period of time. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove that the appellant's promise to marry was false from the inception, and that the consent was vitiated. The court also observed that the prosecutrix's conduct, including continuing the relationship after learning of the marriage, indicated that the promise was not the sole basis for consent. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Consent - Promise to Marry - Section 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The issue was whether the appellant's conviction for rape under Section 376 IPC was sustainable when the prosecutrix consented to sexual relations on a promise to marry, but the appellant was already married. The court held that the evidence was inconsistent and the prosecutrix's conduct indicated voluntary participation, thus the promise to marry was not the sole basis for consent. The conviction was set aside and the appellant was acquitted. (Paras 1-13) B) Criminal Procedure - Appeal against Conviction - Section 374(2) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The appellant appealed against his conviction and sentence under Section 376 IPC. The court allowed the appeal, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 2-13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction under Section 376 IPC for rape based on a promise to marry is sustainable when the evidence regarding the promise and consent is inconsistent.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted.
Law Points
- Consent based on promise to marry is not vitiated unless the promise was false from inception
- Burden of proof on prosecution to establish lack of consent
- Acquittal under Section 376 IPC when evidence is inconsistent
