Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The complainant was adult enough to know that the law forbids a second marriage and there was no allegation in the complaint that applicant promised to divorce his first wife and then marry her.
The Court refrained from commenting on the merits of the contentions of either party, as trial was pending in the matter.
“Effacing abominable offences through quashing process would not only send a wrong signal to the community, but may also accord an undue benefit to unscrupulous habitual or professional offenders, who can secure a “settlement” through duress, threats, social boycotts, bribes or other dubious means”
The Court noted that Section 90 of IPC does not define the term “consent”, but the law does not see “consent derived from a fear of injury and misconception of fact” as consent.
In the guise of loving the minor girl, the boy had poured some intoxicating substance in the tea which made the girl unconscious and had aggravated sexual intercourse with her.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
There was no occasion for the State to file the present appeal, as once it is on record that the prosecutrix was living happy married life with the respondent, then, this Court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb the happy family life of the respondent and the prosecutrix.
The Court held that while delay in reporting rape is not always material, in the present case, it is crucial due to the complainant’s history and the timing of her allegations.
‘In a young age when relationship develops, they naturally carry impression that they will get married. However, sometimes it fails, and the girl, considering herself to be betrayed and deceived, cannot lodge the FIR saying that rape has been committed with her.”
The Court observed that the parents of the victims were illiterate and that the appellant’s allegations of false implications and extortion on the victim’s family’s part did not inspire any confidence as per evidence on record.
A relationship may be consensual at the beginning, but the same state may not remain so for all time to come. Whenever one of the partners show their unwillingness to indulge in a sexual relationship, the character of the relationship as ‘consensual’ ceases to exist.
“The Court below lost sight of the rudimentary principle governing rape and convicted the convict on the strength of the gospel that Indian women do not lie in such matters, which cannot be sustained, as the facts surrounding each and every case and the evidence available ought to form the basis of arriving at a finding, and the surrounding scenario cannot be the basis to render a finding.”
“There is clear distinction between rape and a consensual sex. The Court in such cases carefully examined whether accused actually wanted to marry victim or had a malafide motive and had made a false promise to this effect to satisfy his lust, as latter false ambit of cheating or deception. There is a distinction between breach of promise or not fulfilling the promise.”
‘The D.G.P., U.P., Lucknow is directed to file affidavit enclosing the circulars related to the accountability of the Investigating Officer, Supervising Officer, Monitoring Officer and other higher officials, by the next date of listing’
“No reasonable person would believe the prosecutrix’s allegations given the circumstances and inconsistencies in her statements.”
The Court criticised the investigating officer and the treating doctor for not informing the survivor’s family about the pregnancy and the option for termination, considering the survivor’s minor status and health risks.
The Court stated that as per the amended definition of rape, any sexual intercourse or act, by the husband with his wife not below the age of fifteen years is not a rape, therefore, consent is immaterial.
The Gauhati High Court noted that after completion of the investigation, the petitioner was not examined under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, to enable him to personally explain circumstances appearing in the evidence against him, nor was his statement recorded.
The Court opined that the prosecution did not place any material or evidence to conclude that reformation, rehabilitation, and social re-integration of the accused into society was not possible.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.