SC Reiterates Law on Misconception of Fact Arising Out of Promise To Marry and Examination of Accused

Must Read

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi,...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions,...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by...

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour...

Follow us

On September 28th 2020, a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court acquitted a rape Accused-Appellant in the case of Maheshwar Tigga v The State of Jharkhand. The court observed that misconception of fact arising out of a promise to marry has to be in proximity of time to the occurrence and cannot be spread over a long period coupled with a conscious positive action not to protest.

Background 

The Trial Court convicted the appellant and held that the Prosecutrix was fourteen years of age when the Appellant had first committed rape upon her at the point of a knife. He did not abide by his promise to marry her. Moreover, the High Court dismissed the appeal. It opined that the letters were written by the appellant to the prosecutrix, their photographs together, and the statement of the appellant recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was sufficient to sustain the conviction. Hence, the Appellant assailed his conviction before the Supreme Court. 

Appellant’s Contentions

The Appellant’s Counsel submitted that the physical relations between the Appellant and the Prosecutrix were consensual. Moreover, the questions put to the Appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were very casual and perfunctory. It led to the denial of proper opportunity of defence causing serious prejudice to him. It denied him right to a fair trial. The marriage between them could not materialise due to societal reasons as the Appellant belonged to the Scheduled Tribe, while the prosecutrix was a Christian.

State’s Contentions 

The Counsel for the State submitted that the defence of a consensual relationship is irrelevant considering that the Prosecutrix was fourteen years of age. The appellant had held out a false promise of marriage only to establish physical relations with the Prosecutrix. He obtained the consent of the appellant by a false misrepresentation, which is no consent in the eyes of the law.

Court’s Observations

The three-judge Bench comprising Justices Rohinton Fali Nariman, Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee heard the matter. The Bench made several observations concerning the issues at hand.

Firstly, the Court observed that there is a wide variation in the evidence about the age of the Prosecutrix. In the absence of positive evidence being led by the prosecution concerning the age of the Prosecutrix on the date of occurrence, the possibility of her being above the age of eighteen years on the date cannot be ruled out. 

The Bench then proceeded to the issue with respect to the examination of the Accused. A bare perusal of the examination of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. reveals it to be extremely casual and perfunctory. The Court held that, in terms of criminal trials, there is great importance pertaining to the questions put forth to the Accused. 

This is due to the fact that it would provide the Accused with the opportunity not only to furnish his defence but also to explain the incriminating circumstances against him. Thus, the Bench went on to emphasise the importance of putting all relevant questions to an accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C

The Bench further observed that as per Section 90 of the Indian Penal Code, consent given under a misconception of fact is no consent in the eyes of law. However, this misconception of fact has to be in proximity of time to the occurrence and cannot be spread over years.  

The Bench observed that the Consent given by the Appellant was a conscious and informed choice made by her after due deliberation, it is spread over a long period coupled with a conscious positive action not to protest. 

Court’s Decision 

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court allowed the appeal. In doing so, The Bench observed the conviction to be “Unsustainable”. Thus, the conviction of the Appellant was set aside. 


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google NewsInstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention order of the husband of...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions, as well as shareholder disputes...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by P. Sankar & V. Sobana....

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour killing against her by her...

Punjab Woman Accuses Punjab Police of Keeping Husband in Illegal Custody and Framing Him in a False Case

In the case of Geeta v the State of Punjab, the petitioner evoked a writ petition of habeas corpus as she claimed that her...

Addition of Words as Prefixes or Suffixes Is an Infringement of a Registered Trademark: Delhi High Court

Justice Jayanth Nath allowed the Times Group to use its registered trademark “Newshour”, in the case of Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd v. ARG Outlier...

Just Because the Deceased Did Not Have License, Does Not Imply He Was Negligent: Chhattisgarh High Court

In the case of Hemlal & Others v. Dayaram & Others, a Single Bench of Chhattisgarh High Court consisting of Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal annunciated various...

Hoardings Are Movable Property Under Section 2(3) of DMC Act Subject To the Twin Test: Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court in the case of Delhi International Airport v South Delhi Metropolitan Corporation discussed in detail the provision under Section 2(3) of the DMC...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -