Case Note & Summary
Background: This criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 sought quashing of proceedings pending before the 24th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in C.C. No. 40547/2024 arising out of Crime No. 246/2024 registered by Basaveshwara Nagar Police Station. The petitioner No. 1 (accused No. 1), along with his mother and a neighbour, were charged with offences under Sections 376, 420, 323, 504, and 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The case was based on a complaint by respondent No. 2, who alleged that petitioner No. 1 had physical relations with her on the promise of marriage, but the marriage did not materialise. Facts: Petitioner No. 1 and the complainant had known each other for over eight years and had been in a consensual physical relationship since approximately 2016-2017. Families of both parties had initiated marriage talks and even held a betrothal ceremony, but the marriage could not be solemnised due to differences between the families. On 29 June 2024, the complainant lodged a complaint alleging rape, cheating, and criminal intimidation. The police investigated and filed a charge sheet naming the three petitioners as accused. The petitioners then approached the High Court seeking quashing of the proceedings. Legal Issues: The core issue was whether the alleged breach of promise to marry could render the long-standing consensual physical relationship into an offence of rape under Section 376 IPC, and consequently, whether the criminal proceedings were liable to be quashed. Arguments: The petitioners’ counsel contended that the relationship was entirely consensual, rooted in a childhood friendship, and the physical intimacy was not founded on any false promise. The non-fulfilment of the marriage promise did not vitiate consent. The prosecution, represented by the Additional SPP, argued that the charge sheet disclosed cognizable offences and the trial should continue. The complainant, though served, did not appear. Court’s Analysis: The Court examined the factual narrative of the complaint, noting the long-term relationship and the consensual nature of the physical intimacy. It observed that the complainant herself acknowledged the relationship spanning several years and the betrothal ceremony. The Court considered the legal principle that not every breach of a promise to marry amounts to a false promise vitiating consent under Section 376 IPC. The Court emphasised that when a consensual relationship pre-exists a promise and the promise fails due to circumstances, it may not constitute rape. Decision: The judgment text provided is incomplete and does not contain the final operative order. The Court’s reasoning indicates a likely quashing of the proceedings, but the outcome remains unstated in the available extract.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Consent Based on False Promise of Marriage - Section 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Petitioner No. 1 and complainant had a long-standing consensual physical relationship since childhood; betrothal ceremony was performed but marriage did not take place due to differences between families - The complainant registered a crime alleging rape on the ground of breach of promise to marry - The Court examined whether such breach could constitute an offence of rape - Held that a consensual physical relationship based on a promise of marriage that fails due to circumstances cannot automatically lead to criminal prosecution for rape; proceedings may be quashed if the allegations do not make out the essential ingredients of the offence (Para 1-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 376, 420, 323, 504, 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 can be sustained when the allegation is of consensual physical relationship followed by breach of promise to marry, and whether such proceedings merit quashing under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Law Points
- Consensual physical relationship based on promise of marriage that does not materialize may not constitute rape under Section 376 IPC
- breach of promise to marry does not automatically vitiate consent for sexual intercourse.
