Consensual adulterous relationship from its inception does not amount to rape: HC

Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has observed that a long-standing consensual adulterous physical relationship without any element of deception from its inception would not amount to rape within the meaning of section 375 of the IPC, which defines rape as sexual intercourse with a woman against her consent.

The court quashed the criminal proceedings against a man from Moradabad who was accused of raping a woman on the pretext of a promise to marry her. The court also held that a promise of marriage does not automatically render consensual intercourse rape unless it is proven that such a promise was false from the outset. "Each and every promise of marriage would not be considered as a fact of misconception for the purpose of consensual sexual intercourse unless it is established that such promise of marriage was a false promise of marriage on the part of the accused since the beginning of such relationship. Unless it is alleged that from the very beginning of such relationship there was some element of cheating on the part of the accused while making such promise, it would not be treated as a false promise of marriage," the court observed. Allowing a petition filed by one Shrey Gupta, Justice Anish Kumar Gupta quashed the criminal proceedings against the petitioner pending before the court at Moradabad. The petitioner was booked for rape on a complaint by a woman. In her FIR lodged at Mahila Thana at Moradabad, the woman had alleged that the petitioner had established physical relationship with her under the pretext of marriage after the death of her husband. She claimed that Gupta had repeatedly promised to marry her but later broke the promise and got engaged to another woman. She also accused him of extortion, alleging that Gupta demanded Rs 50 lakh to prevent the release of a video showing their intimate encounters. Based on her allegations, the trial court took cognizance of charge sheet dated August 9, 2018 filed against the petitioner under section 376 (rape) and section 386 (extortion) of the IPC. However, the accused moved the high court under section 482 (inherent powers of high court) under the code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), seeking to quash the charge sheet and the entire criminal proceedings. The court after going through the facts, observed that the complainant who is a widow and the accused had maintained a consensual physical relationship for nearly 12-13 years even when the complainant's husband was alive. The court noted that the complainant-woman exerted undue influence over the petitioner, who was much younger than her and was an employee in her late husband's business. Referring to the Supreme Court's ruling in Naim Ahamed vs. State of Haryana, the high court reiterated that it would be a folly to treat every breach of promise to marry as a false promise and to prosecute a person for the offence of rape under Section 376 IPC. Accordingly, the court in its decision dated October 1 quashed the criminal proceedings against Gupta, holding that the allegations did not meet the legal standards required for charges of rape or extortion.