Skip to main content

Legal opinion on false accusation of rape

                                  SHORT NOTE ON LEGAL OPINION

   TOPIC- FALSE ACCUSATION OF RAPE UNDER SECTION 375 OF IPC 


FACTS:

Ram Bahadur is a college boy & preparing UPSC examination. He has fallen in love with his girlfriend Usha. Usha is a medical student, Usha  used to love Ram Bahadur. Both used to visit each other & had established physical relations several times during the last one year. However, after Ram Bahadur qualified IAS examination refused to marry Usha Citing that Usha is of a backward caste for which parents are not ready. Usha filed a rape case against Ram Bahadur. 


LEGAL ISSUE:

How can Ram Bahadur manage get out of Rape Accusation filed by Usha.


BACKGROUND:

A Delhi commission of Women report shows that 53.2% of the rape case filed b/w April 2013 and July 2014 in the capital were found false. This report draw the attention of the population that how the law used as an instrument of harassment or oppression. In order to take control and stop women filing false Rape cases, distinction between Rape & Consensual sex is crucial. 


LEGAL ASPECTS:

Rape is a heinous crime against Women under Section 375 of IPC, 1860. Rape has been defined as certain sexual acts when committed on a victim under seven condition are as follow:

  • Against her will,

  • Without her consent,

  • With her consent, when consent has been obtained under the fear of death or hurt,

  • When consent has been given by the victim in the misconception of facts,

  • When consent is given when she is of unsound mind or intoxicated and unable to understand the nature of consequences of her consenting,

  • When she is not in position to communicate the consent,

  • When her consent has been obtained under 18 year of age


In the contrary, Consensual sex is established with the consent of two adults and not consider as a crime.


JUDGEMENTS:

In the case of Uday V. State of Karnataka (2003) inference drawn by Supreme Court that there is no hard & fast rule to determine whether a sexual relationship is a case of heinous crime of rape  or mere consensual sex with valid consent of 2 adults. It is primarily based on Judicial opinion. 

In the case of Deelip Singh alias Dilip Kumar V. State of Bihar (2005) Supreme Court held that woman had taken conscious decision with active application of her mind giving consent to the Man for having sexual relationship which is not amounting to Rape. At best it is a case of breach of promise to marry & accused is prima Facie accountable for damages under civil law. 

In the case of Deepak Gulati V. State of Haryana (2013) Supreme Court held that physical relation between parties clearly developed with the consent of woman. She neither resisted nor complaint since the beginning of the relation but when the differences created between them she decided to sue the man for the case of rape which is consider as abuse of law. A far as promise to marry concern man was willing to marry woman which indicates that there is no mala fide intention to satisfy his lust but ability to marry is beyond his control.

In the case of Shivshankar V. State of Karnataka (2018) Supreme Court held that man & woman are in mutual relationship since 8 years. During the course of physical relationship woman never resist or raise complaint which indicate that physical relationship developed b/w the parties with consent. The court will Examine whether a man makes promise to marry with bona fide intention or just to satisfy his lust. 

PROVISION FOR SAFEGUARDING INTREST OF JUSTICE:


In order to safeguard the interest of Justice, there is a provision in section 482 under CrPC. Under the provision High Court has power to quash FIR of false rape case based on defences mention in the FIR. Make sure that before approaching High Court under Section 482 of CrPC, woman should be above 18 years of age otherwise your appeal would be quashed.

In the Case of Haryana V. Bhajan Lal & others (1992) High Court issued 7 guidelines under section 482 of CrPC to Quash FIRs

In the case of Karnataka V. M Devendrappa & another (2002) laid down condition in the section 482 of CrPC should be satisfied to quash FIRs

In the case of Vineet Kumar V. State of U.P. (2017) court held that the purpose of section 482 of CrPC is for the advancement of justice and no abuse of law, judicial process cannot be allowed to convert into instrument of oppression or Harassment.

In the case of Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar  V. State of Maharashtra (2018) Court held that there is no mala fide intention to create physical relationship. Doctor already disclosed the fact that he is married and up to divorce. The widow nurse had taken conscious decision with active application of mind to consenting physical relation with Doctor. There is a distinction between breach of promise & not fulfilling a false promise. The accused is not liable for Rape under Section 375 of IPC.

In the case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar V. state of Maharashtra (2019) Supreme Court held that there is distinction between Rape & Consensual Sex. As far as case concern, man & woman in a physical relationship without any resistance and multiple cohabitation, woman aware about the fact that there is a caste barrier which does not allow them the marry, still they continue to have physical relations for long period of time without resistance. When difference creates between parties woman decided to sue man for the case of Rape. Consider the fact of the case, it is clearly visible that the physical relation created with the valid consent of man & women which resulted into consensual sex not amounting to Rape.

Supreme Court also held that promise to marry should not have mala fide intention to satisfy lust and immediate relevance of the men promise to marry have no nexus to women decision to encourage sexual act. 


OPINION:

Ram Bahadur & Usha established physical relation with valid consent of each other. There is no resistance on the part of Usha since the beginning of the relation & she never raise any alarm for Rape accusation. They both aware of the fact the caste differences may not allow them to marry or continue there relation for lifetime. But when differences creates between the parties Usha Decided to sue Ram Bahadur for the offence of Rape. 

In my opinion, Ram Bahadur & Usha had consented to sex which resulted in Consensual sex not an offence of Rape. Ram Bahadur should approach High Court under section 482 of CrPC and honorable High Court Should Quash the FIR in order to discourage such abuse of law and mislead the Judiciary by creating false case. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more