Delhi High Court Acquits Chhotey Lal in Rape Case Over Consent Misconception
Court rules prosecutrix's consent was voluntary, not under false promise of marriage
In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has acquitted Chhotey Lal of rape charges, overturning the trial court's conviction. The court ruled that the prosecutrix's consent to engage in physical relations with the accused was voluntary and not under a misconception of fact, as she was aware of his marital status.
The case, initially tried in the Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, involved allegations that Chhotey Lal had enticed the prosecutrix, taking her to various locations and establishing sexual relations under a false promise of marriage. The prosecutrix claimed that she was threatened to comply with the accused's demands, fearing harm to her brother.
Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, presiding over the appeal, meticulously reviewed the evidence and testimonies. The prosecutrix had testified that she willingly accompanied the accused, despite knowing he was married with six children. She also admitted to assisting him in his work during their six-month stay in Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.
In the judgment, the court highlighted the distinction between a breach of promise and a false promise, citing precedents from the Supreme Court. A false promise implies a lack of intention to marry from the outset, whereas a breach of promise might occur due to unforeseen circumstances. The court found that the prosecutrix was conscious of the implications of her actions, negating the claim of consent under a misconception.
The ruling underscored that consent given freely, even amidst a promise of marriage, does not amount to a misconception of fact under Section 90 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court stressed the importance of examining evidence and circumstances surrounding consent, emphasizing that each case must be assessed on its unique facts.
This judgment serves as a crucial reference in cases involving allegations of rape under false promises of marriage, reinforcing the legal understanding of consent and the evidentiary standards required to prove such claims.
Bottom Line:
Consent to physical relations given voluntarily by a prosecutrix, aware of all relevant facts including the accused’s marital status, cannot be considered consent under misconception of fact as per Section 90 IPC.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 376, 90, 375 IPC, Section 374(2) CrPC
