The Supreme Court said courts must distinguish between rape and consensual sex, emphasising careful assessment of allegations based on false marriage promises
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that there exists a “clear distinction between rape and consensual sex.” It ruled that courts must carefully assess allegations of sexual assault made on the promise of marriage. If the accused never intended to marry, and made a false promise with sexual intentions, it held. Such conduct would amount to cheating or deception.
The top court stressed that false or vexatious complaints tarnish a person’s image. They also amount to an abuse of judicial process. A bench of justices JB Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta quashed criminal proceedings against a man accused of rape. They stressed that false or vexatious complaints tarnish a person’s image. Such complaints also amount to an abuse of judicial process.
Also read: Supreme Court Reviews Discrimination Against Women Officers in Short Service Commission
“It is by now well settled that this is very serious. Summoning any person on the basis of a frivolous or vexatious complaint is unacceptable. This would tarnish the image of the person. These are individuals against whom false, frivolous, and vexatious allegations are levelled,” the bench observed in its ruling last week.
Four steps guidance to High Courts
The bench provided guidance for high courts. They addressed petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This is now Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The bench framed a four-step test. This test determines whether criminal proceedings should be quashed.
First, the court must be satisfied that the material relied upon by the accused is of impeccable quality. It should be beyond doubt. It must then assess whether such material, if accepted, can dislodge the foundation of the allegations. Additionally, it should persuade a reasonable person that the accusations are false. Third, the court should also consider whether the prosecution or complainant has failed to refute the material placed on record. The court should determine if such material is of a kind that cannot be justifiably contested. Finally, the High Court must determine whether allowing the proceedings to continue would be an abuse of the judicial process. It must also decide if it would fail to serve the ends of justice.
If all these requirements are met, the judgment held. The high court’s judicial conscience should impel it to quash the proceedings. This action not only protects the accused from needless harassment but also saves valuable court time.
Supreme Court acted on an appeal against order of Allahabd High Court
The ruling came in an appeal against a 2019 order of the Allahabad High Court. The court had refused to quash criminal proceedings. These proceedings were initiated on the complaint of a woman. She alleged rape, unnatural sex, assault, and caste atrocity against the accused in 2014. The alleged incidents date back to 2010.
The complainant filed her case four years after the alleged incidents, also implicating the accused’s parents. The magistrate issued summons under Section 376 (rape) of the IPC, which was later upheld by the high court.
The accused challenged this through senior counsel Rahul Kaushik. He argued that he had been in a consensual relationship with the complainant. This relationship had soured. He also claimed that the case was an abuse of process.
Agreeing, the Supreme Court said the complaint “doesn’t inspire any confidence.” It was devoid of specific particulars such as date and place of incident. “There is no good explanation offered. The bench noted it took four years for the complainant to file a case.”
It added: “The appellant was dragged into the criminal proceedings. Even the parents of the appellant were arrayed as accused… Various other offences have been alleged. This itself makes the entire case doubtful.”
Rape basis false promise of marriage is complex
The court underscored that genuine allegations of rape on false promise of marriage must be treated seriously. However, courts should also guard against its misuse. “In a case where there is a promise of marriage, the court must very carefully examine the accused’s true intentions. Did the accused actually want to marry the victim? Or did the accused have mala fide motives and make a false promise only to satisfy his lust?” the bench said.
The court found the allegations against the accused to be baseless. It allowed his appeal and set aside the high court’s refusal. The court quashed the criminal proceedings pending before the Allahabad magistrate.
For all latest updates Follow theviralmail on X, Facebook, and Instagram
