Case Note & Summary
The appeal was filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment dated 12.06.2014 and order of sentence dated 17.06.2014 passed by the VII Additional Sessions Judge, Mysuru in Sessions Case No.78/2011. The appellant-accused was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 376 (rape) and 417 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs.50,000 for the rape charge, and six months rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,000 for the cheating charge. The prosecution case originated from a complaint filed on 28.11.2010 by the victim girl, a resident of Tagaduru village, alleging that she was in a love relationship with the accused for two years and that six months prior to the complaint, he forcibly had sexual intercourse with her on the false promise of marriage, against her wishes. It was alleged that a panchayat was convened at Malle temple where the accused's father and uncle sought two months' time to perform the accused's sister's marriage before arranging the marriage, but thereafter the accused and his family vacated the village and did not honour the promise, leading to the complaint. The police investigated the matter, arrested the accused, seized material objects, conducted medical examinations, and filed a charge sheet. The trial court examined 24 prosecution witnesses and marked 29 exhibits and 14 material objects, and after hearing arguments, convicted the accused. In the appeal before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, the appellant contended that the evidence did not support the charges, arguing that the relationship was consensual and that he never promised marriage, that the medical evidence did not prove rape, and that the trial court misappreciated the evidence. The respondent State supported the conviction, submitting that the victim's testimony was corroborated by her father and other witnesses and that the trial court's appreciation was correct. The High Court heard the arguments on 30.05.2024 and reserved judgment. On 07.06.2024, the court framed two points for consideration: whether the impugned judgment suffers from illegality due to improper appreciation of evidence, and if so, whether it requires interference. The provided judgment text contains only the preliminary discussion including the definitions of cheating and rape under the IPC and the points for consideration, but the court's analysis, findings, and final decision are not included in the excerpt. Consequently, the ratio decidendi and the ultimate outcome of the appeal are not available from the text.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of conviction and order of sentence suffers from illegality and without properly appreciating the evidence; and if so, whether the judgment of conviction and order of sentence requires interference by this Court.
Law Points
- Cheating under Section 415 IPC requires deception and fraudulent or dishonest inducement causing delivery of property or consent to retain property
- or intentional inducement to do or omit an act causing harm to body
- mind
- reputation or property. Rape under Section 375 IPC involves penetration or manipulation under circumstances such as against will
- without consent
- consent obtained by fear
- misconception of identity
- unsoundness of mind
- underage
- or inability to communicate consent.
Case Details
2024 LawText (KAR) (06) 19
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 884 OF 2014
Chandrashekar P., M.Divakar Maddur
Prakasha S/O Muddumadegowda
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for offences under Sections 376 and 417 IPC.
Remedy Sought
Appellant seeks to set aside the judgment of conviction dated 12.06.2014 and order of sentence dated 17.06.2014 passed by the trial court.
Filing Reason
Complaint by victim alleging that accused had sexual intercourse with her on the false promise of marriage and thereafter cheated her, leading to charges under Sections 376 and 417 IPC.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted the accused under Sections 376 and 417 IPC and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs.50,000 for rape, and six months rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,000 for cheating.
Issues
Whether the judgment of conviction and order of sentence suffers from illegality and without properly appreciating the evidence?
If so, whether the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial court requires interference by this Court?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the facts do not attract Sections 417 and 376 IPC; the trial court misappreciated the evidence; the complainant and accused were in a consensual love affair known to their families; accused never promised to marry the victim; medical evidence does not prove rape; and the evidence of prosecution witnesses is contradictory and does not inspire confidence.
Respondent State argued that the victim girl's evidence alone is sufficient to convict; her testimony is supported by her father, the second wife of her father, and the panchayatdars; the trial court rightly appreciated the evidence; and the impugned judgment requires no interference.
Judgment Excerpts
Section 415 of IPC defines `Cheating'. It reads as under: "Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to "cheat".
That means in the offence of cheating, there are two elements:- a) Deception and dishonest inducement to do or omit to do something. b) Mere dishonesty is not a criminal offence.
Section 375. Rape .—A man is said to commit "rape" if he— (a) penetrates his penis, to any extent, into the vagina, mouth, urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; ...
In view of the rival submission of both the side the following points arise for my consideration: i. Whether the judgment of conviction and order of sentence suffers from illegality and without properly appreciating the evidence? ii. If so, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial court impugned in this appeal requires interference by this Court?
Procedural History
The victim filed a complaint on 28.11.2010 leading to registration of FIR in Crime No.179/2010. Investigation was conducted, charge sheet filed, and the case was committed to Sessions Court. Trial was held in S.C.No.78/2011 before the VII Additional Sessions Judge, Mysuru. On 12.06.2014, the accused was convicted for offences under Sections 376 and 417 IPC and sentenced on 17.06.2014. The accused preferred an appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. to the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru. The appeal was heard and reserved on 30.05.2024, and judgment was pronounced on 07.06.2024.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 376, 417, 415, 375
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 374(2)
