Case Note & Summary
The State of Karnataka, through the Mico Layout Police Station, filed a criminal revision petition under Sections 397 read with 401 CrPC challenging the order dated 11.10.2017 passed by the 53rd Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in S.C.No.446/2017. By that order, the Sessions Court allowed the application filed by the accused, Jatin Chhabria, under Section 227 CrPC and discharged him from the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 420/417 of the Indian Penal Code. The factual matrix of the case is that on 11.02.2016, the complainant lodged a complaint alleging that the accused, who was known to her, promised to marry her and on that false promise, had sexual intercourse with her on multiple occasions. Later, the accused refused to marry her, leading to the filing of the FIR. The State contended that the Sessions Court erred in discharging the accused by conducting a mini-trial and weighing evidence at the stage of Section 227 CrPC, whereas only a prima facie case is required to frame charges. The accused argued that the relationship was consensual and there was no false promise. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that the Sessions Court had exceeded its jurisdiction by appreciating evidence in detail and coming to a conclusion that no case was made out. The High Court found that the allegations in the complaint and the material on record prima facie disclose the ingredients of the offences under Sections 376 and 420/417 IPC. The court emphasized that at the stage of Section 227 CrPC, the court is only to see whether there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, and not to evaluate the truth or sufficiency of evidence. Accordingly, the High Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Sessions Court to proceed with the trial in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Discharge under Section 227 - Standard of Proof - At the stage of Section 227 CrPC, the court is only to see whether a prima facie case is made out, not to weigh evidence meticulously - Held that the Sessions Court erred by conducting a mini-trial and discharging the accused (Paras 3-5). B) Indian Penal Code - Rape - Section 376 - False Promise of Marriage - If the promise to marry was false from the inception and the accused had no intention to marry, sexual intercourse based on such promise amounts to rape - Held that the complainant's allegations that the accused promised marriage and had sexual relations on that basis, coupled with subsequent refusal, raise a prima facie case (Paras 3-5). C) Indian Penal Code - Cheating - Sections 420/417 - Deception by False Promise - Where the accused induced the complainant to part with her chastity by a false promise of marriage, it constitutes cheating - Held that the allegations disclose ingredients of cheating (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Sessions Court was justified in discharging the accused for offences under Sections 376 and 420/417 IPC at the stage of Section 227 CrPC.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the revision petition, set aside the order dated 11.10.2017 passed by the 53rd Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in S.C.No.446/2017, and directed the Sessions Court to proceed with the trial in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Discharge under Section 227 CrPC
- Prima facie case
- Rape by false promise of marriage
- Cheating by deception
- Standard of proof at framing of charges
