Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, including the main accused Bharat Devdan Salvi and his family members, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of FIR No.46 of 2015 registered at Bhosari Police Station, Pune, for offences under Sections 376 (rape) and 417 (cheating) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The FIR was lodged by Respondent No.2, who was engaged to marry Petitioner No.1. She alleged that on 9 December 2014, Petitioner No.1 had sexual intercourse with her against her will and without consent, and that subsequently, Petitioner No.1 and his family members called off the marriage, thereby cheating her. The petitioners contended that the FIR did not disclose the ingredients of rape or cheating. The court examined the allegations and found that the sexual intercourse was consensual, based on a promise of marriage. The court noted that the promise was not false from the inception; the marriage was called off due to lack of compatibility. The court held that a subsequent breach of promise to marry does not convert consensual sex into rape. Regarding the family members, the court observed that they were merely present during marriage negotiations and no specific overt acts were alleged against them. Consequently, the court quashed the FIR against all petitioners.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Consent - Promise of Marriage - Section 375 IPC - Sexual intercourse based on a promise to marry does not amount to rape if the promise was not false from the inception and the woman consented voluntarily. The court held that the failure to marry due to incompatibility does not vitiate consent retrospectively. (Paras 3-4) B) Criminal Law - Cheating - Section 415 IPC - Breach of promise to marry does not constitute cheating unless there was fraudulent intention at the time of promise. The court found no material to indicate that the petitioner had no intention to marry at the time of intercourse. (Para 4) C) Criminal Law - Vicarious Liability - Family Members - Sections 376, 417 r/w 34 IPC - Family members cannot be prosecuted for rape or cheating merely because they were present during marriage negotiations. Specific allegations of overt acts are required. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether sexual intercourse based on a promise to marry constitutes rape under Section 375 IPC when the promise is subsequently broken due to incompatibility, and whether family members can be prosecuted for such offences without specific overt acts.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR No.46 of 2015 registered with Bhosari Police Station, Pune, for offences under Sections 376 and 417 r/w 34 IPC against all petitioners.
Law Points
- Consent given under promise of marriage is not vitiated unless promise was false from inception
- Breach of promise to marry does not constitute rape if consent was voluntary
- Family members cannot be vicariously liable for rape or cheating without specific allegations
