- विज्ञापन -
Punjab and Haryana: Punjab and Haryana High Court rejected the lower court’s decision to sentence the lover to 7 years imprisonment in the case of having physical relations on the promise of marriage. While giving the verdict, the High Court said that not fulfilling the promise cannot always mean that the promise was false. A case of rape is made only when there is an intention of deception behind the promise.
In the verdict, High Court Justice Harpreet Brar said that according to the testimony of the victim, she had met her lover once before. On the same day, she decided to run away with him. In such a situation, it seems impossible that the appellant lover would have made a false promise of marriage when they met for the second time.
The High Court said that the victim’s testimony shows that the accused did not kidnap her against her will. She sat behind him on his bike. Then they went to Kala Amb. They stayed together there for several days. Lack of consent from the woman is mandatory to prove rape.
According to the FIR registered in this case, the accused lover had called her to take her somewhere for marriage. After which the victim went with him of her own free will. After this, the lover took her to a tubewell. Where she was raped. After this, the victim’s medico-legal examination was done. After which rape sections were added to the FIR.
In the court, the lover’s lawyer said that the woman is an adult. She ran away with her lover of her own free will. The woman stayed with him for 3 days. She also went a long distance on a bike. During this time, the woman did not protest in any way. All these circumstances prove that the woman had consent.
Therefore, in this case, the appellant lover did not commit any crime. After hearing the arguments, the High Court said that the victim is above 18 years of age. There is no evidence that she protested while living with the accused.
In this case, the Additional Sessions Court of Yamunanagar had sentenced the lover. In which he was sentenced to 7 years imprisonment under section 376 of IPC, 2 years under section 363 and 5 years rigorous imprisonment under section 366. All the sentences were to run simultaneously, so he got a maximum of 7 years imprisonment. The High Court rejected this and acquitted the lover.
