A decade later, Bombay HC quashes rape case against man

The Bombay High Court quashed criminal proceedings against a man accused of rape based on the promise of marriage. The court deemed the prosecution to be a gross abuse of the process of law.
A decade later, Bombay HC quashes rape case against man
Bombay high court
MUMBAI: In a relief for a man after a decade, the Bombay high court quashed criminal proceedings against him for allegedly raping a woman on the promise of marriage.
“In my view, continuing the prosecution will be gross abuse of the process of law,’’ said Justice Makarand Karnik on Feb 16. He quashed the July 2016 order of Pune sessions court that refused to discharge the man.
The December 2013 FIR said the woman was introduced to him seven years earlier.
She then met him in 2011 and they exchanged numbers. Later, he proposed to her and she accepted it. In Sept 2011 she visited his home and they had physical relations. On the promise of marriage, it was repeated on several occasions. When she learnt of his relationship with another woman, he denied it. When she reminded him about his promise of marriage he refused. The prosecutor said the man promised her marriage and under this misconception, she consented to a physical relationship. Justice Karnik noted that when their relationship commenced in 2011 the woman was 18 years old and when the FIR was filed she was 30 years of age.
“Though the relationship commenced in the year 2011, the complainant did not make any grievance about it till December 2013. It is not the case of the complainant that the applicant forced her to maintain the physical relationship. The complainant was in a love relationship with the applicant prior to the physical relationship,’’ he added.
Justice Karnik said that from the accusation and material on record, it is obvious that the physical relationship was consensual. “It is not possible to accept that the complainant maintained the physical relationship only because the applicant had given a promise of marriage. This is not a case where a consent of the complainant is based on misconception,’’ he concluded. He directed that the man “be discharged from all the charges.”
End of Article
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA