Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court has recently observed that it cannot be said that the offence of rape was committed merely because the man backed out from his promise to marry, citing parental disagreement.

“It is clear from the allegations in the F.I.R. that it is the applicant, who was ready to marry. Merely because he resiled from his promise to marry, since his parents were not agreeable to their marriage, it cannot be said that the applicant committed the offence punishable under Section 375 of I.P.C. In the fact of the present case, no offence was made out against the applicant,” the order reads.

A single-judge bench of the high court at Nagpur, presided over by Justice MW Chandwani, was hearing an appeal filed by a man who sought to have the rape case against him quashed.

The victim met the accused through her sister in 2016, following which they engaged in a physical relationship based on the accused's promise to marry. The physical relationship persisted within the rented house of the victim's sister.

Subsequently, the victim discovered that the accused had become involved with another woman. Upon confronting the accused, he disclosed that he was willing to marry her, but his parents disagreed.

Undeterred, the victim approached the accused's father, who also declined the marriage proposal. Consequently, in 2019, she filed a rape case against the accused.

The accused had filed an application before the Sessions Court for discharge in the case, but the request was denied.  Therefore. he approached the high court.

Advocate JM Gandhi, representing the accused, argued that the WhatsApp chats would demonstrate the accused's willingness to fulfil the marriage commitment, asserting that it was the victim who initially displayed a lack of interest in proceeding with the marriage.

Additional Public Prosecutor SA Ashirgade contended that the victim's consent was obtained under misconception, and therefore, it should not be considered valid consent. He maintained that the offence was established against the accused.

After perusing the chats, the high court stated that initially, the applicant was willing to marry the victim. However, it was the victim who declined and informed the applicant that she intended to marry another boy.

The bench said that the complaint was lodged by the victim only after the applicant became engaged to another girl.

Consequently, the bench quashed the rape case against the man, emphasizing that even the allegations in the F.I.R. did not, prima facie, indicate that the promise made by the applicant was false.

Case title: Gaurav Wankhede vs State of Maharashtra & Anr