The Calcutta High Court recently overturned a trial court’s decision that convicted a man under section 417 (punishment of cheating) of the Indian Penal Code of inducing a woman to have sexual relations with him in exchange for the promise to marry her after his previous marriage was annulled.
The single-judge bench of Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury observed that the woman was aware of the situation and still she decided to live together with the accused; therefore the promise of marriage, after divorce, by itself did not amount to cheating.
“In order to invoke the provision of Section 415 of I.P.C., prosecution is under obligation to prove that the accused person induced the victim to indulge in any such sexual relationship with him,” the court said.
Gaurav Bir Basnet filed an appeal against the conviction order of the trial court of Alipore. The trial court convicted him of the offence of cheating and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 10,00,000, out of which Rs 8,00,000 was to be paid to the victim as compensation, and Rs 2,00,000 to be deposited in the state exchequer with a default clause of rigorous imprisonment.
According to the prosecution case, the woman had agreed to live with the accused in his apartment. The accused spoke to the woman’s parents and assured them of his divorce proceedings with his first wife. The woman stated that everyone in the building thought that they were a married couple for 11 months. They also went on trips together. Further, she stated that she had indulged in a sexual relationship with Basnet who gave her a rosy picture of a happily married conjugal life.
On February 14, 2015, the accused left for Mumbai. After coming back, he denied the decision of getting a divorce as this would adversely affect his daughter as well as the prestige of his family in society.
The woman filed a case against the accused under section 417/376 of IPC.
The accused, being aggrieved by the order of the trial court, filed an appeal before the HC.
The counsel appearing for the appellant argued that his client did not suppress any fact pertaining to his personal life. He was sincere in the relationship but he had to change his mind for the future of his daughter.
He further submitted that the woman was aware of his failed marriage, about his daughter, and she had still decided to live with him. There is no reason to hold that she took the decision to stay with the accused under any misconception of fact, he said.
The counsel also argued that the trial court committed an error in recording the order of conviction under section 417.
The woman’s counsel submitted that there had been no such assurance that the appellant would take steps to dissolve his first marriage and therefore the victim decided to live with him relying upon the promise made.
The court after hearing the parties observed that the woman was aware that the appellant was married and he had a daughter but was living apart from his wife upon mutual agreement. Thereafter, she agreed to live together with the man, and for that, she shifted to his flat, as there was a promise, made by the appellant to marry her, after the dissolution of his first marriage.
“The promise of marriage, so made by the accused person, was not a promise simplicitor, it was contingent on dissolution of his marriage, that was subsisting,” the court said.
Further, the HC mentioned that the element of uncertainty was there since the inception of such a relationship and the woman consciously accepted such a risk.
“The promise of themarriage, after divorce, by itself does not amount to cheating,” said the court.
The HC stated that the prosecution had not been able to prove its case and the trial court committed an error in recording the order of conviction.
The bench allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned conviction for the alleged offence under section 417 of IPC.
Read all the Latest India News here
Comments
0 comment