The Delhi High Court has directed a man accused of having physical relations with a married woman under the promise of marriage to frame rape charges against not only the complainant but also her husband and family.
Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma termed it a “double promise of marriage” case, and stressed that a test was needed to find out whether the actions of the accused were in breach of the promise or for the purpose of sexual intercourse. Made a false promise.
The court said that the accused had given a promise of marriage to the woman, her legally married husband and her family and had promised to marry her after the divorce and take responsibility of their children.
“Surprisingly, as per the admitted facts, respondent no. 2 had given a marriage promise not only to the petitioner but also to her legally married husband and family that after the divorce, he would not only marry her but also the children born to her and her legally married husband Will take care. ” It said.
Justice Sharma said the act of the accused prima facie points towards the woman divorcing her husband and having sexual relations on the basis of his promise, which probably falls under Section 376 (punishment for rape) of the IPC.
“The acts of defendant no. 2 (the accused person), thus, prima facie indicates at this stage that she had promised the petitioner to marry her and had lived with her on this promise, acting upon which she not only divorced her husband but Not only had he given it, he had also given it a divorce. Had sexual relations with her to attract the rigors of IPC section 376 (punishment for rape),” the bench said.
The court also found sufficient evidence to frame charges of criminal intimidation as per the FIR, where the accused allegedly refused to marry the woman, abused her and threatened to harm her and her children.
Disposing of the woman’s plea challenging the trial court’s discharge order, the High Court set aside the order and directed the sessions court to frame charges of rape and criminal intimidation against the accused.
The Court took note of the preparation of the ‘Mangalsutra’ with the initials of the person’s name and the payment made and held it to be reflective of his intention and promise to marry the petitioner.
The court said, “Needless to say that in India, Mangalsutra is not just an ornament for many women, but a symbol of love, sacred union and assurance of living together with one’s partner throughout life.”
Recognizing that the mangalsutra holds significance as a symbol of love and sacred union, the court emphasized that it was not engaging in moral policing but was addressing the legal aspects of the matter.
As per the facts of the case, the woman and the man married their respective partners in 2011 and in 2016, after experiencing mutual unhappiness in their marriage, they decided to separate. The woman alleged that the man assured her of marriage and they both agreed to get married after her divorce, with the man also committing to take care of her children.
Justice Sharma acknowledged the unique circumstances where the parties not only verbally assured each other of their intention to divorce their respective partners, but also followed through on these promises. The court also highlighted that her former partner was aware of their relationship and her intention to marry after getting a divorce.
Conclusively, the court ordered, “This court is of the opinion that there is sufficient material on record to frame charges against respondent no. Under Section 376/506 of IPC 2. In view of this, the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Court on 08.06.2023 on the basis of which respondent no. In the present case 2 were acquitted, set aside. The learned Sessions Court is directed to frame charges against respondent no. 2 under section 376/506 of IPC and proceed with the case as per law.
Follow us on Google news ,Twitter , and Join Whatsapp Group of thelocalreport.in
