Mature, married woman cannot claim rape on promise of marriage: HC

A married, fully mature woman cannot claim rape on the ground of a promise to marry, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held, while ruling that consent given in such circumstances does not amount to inducement. The assertion came as the court quashed rape charge against an advocate after finding that the complainant – also a practising lawyer with a subsisting marriage – had been in a long-standing consensual relationship.

“When a fully mature, married woman consents to sexual intercourse on a promise of marriage and continues to so indulge, it is merely a reckless disregard of the institution of marriage, not an act of inducement by misconception of fact,” the Bench ruled.

Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal asserted it was evident from the undisputed documents that the complainant’s status was that of a married woman. Her claim that the petitioner had physical relations with her on the promise of marriage was outrightly unacceptable. “The prosecutrix, being an advocate, was well aware that she had a subsisting valid marriage,” the court held.

The Bench also made it clear that rape offence was not made out against the petitioner, even if it was assumed that petitioner did promise to marry her. The order came as the court partly allowing the petition seeking quashing of an FIR registered in November 2020, at a women police station in Haryana. The court quashed offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 180 and 506 of the IPC from the chargesheet, but directed that proceedings would continue only for the offence under Section 67-A of the Information Technology Act. The Bench was assisted in the matter by counsel Vaibhav Sharma.

The background

The Bench observed that the petitioner and his father were her counsels in an FIR registered for subjecting a married woman to cruelty under Section 498-A of the IPC. The complainant’s case was that the petitioner expressed his love for her and tried to get involved sexually. She contacted his father and told him that she would agree only if his son solemnised marriage with her. His father assured her that he would arrange the marriage, she added.

After reviewing the material, Justice Nagpal concluded that the prosecutrix had maintained a consensual relationship, and her complaint appeared to arise from personal upheaval. “It appears that over a long period of time, prosecutrix engaged in sexual relationship with the petitioner, suffered an emotional set back when her real sister got engaged with the petitioner and as a backlash got the case registered”.

‘Inconceivable that a legally married woman could be induced on promise of marriage’

The court asserted that the complainant was not only highly educated, having completed her law degree in 2019, but also actively practising as an advocate and pursuing matrimonial litigation. Holding her fully capable of understanding the legal consequences of her conduct, the court observed: “It is inconceivable that a legally married woman could be induced into a sexual relationship on the promise of marriage.”

The court observed that it could rely on undisputed documentary evidence produced by the petitioner. “There is no bar for this Court to rely upon material produced by the petitioner, authenticity of which is not in dispute. The overall circumstances have to be taken into account, including the evidence collected during investigation and undisputed, authentic documents.”