Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Consent Not Under Misconception of Fact": Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Alleged False Promise of Marriage Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court, in a landmark decision yesterday, overruled the High Court's stance and dismissed the FIR in a case alleging rape under a false promise of marriage, emphasizing the concept of "Consent Not Under Misconception of Fact."

The apex court's decision pivoted on the interpretation of consent in the context of rape allegations under Section 376(2)(n) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The key legal issue addressed was whether the consent provided by the complainant was under a misconception of fact, thereby influencing the applicability of these sections.

The appeal was against the High Court's refusal to quash an FIR lodged by a woman who accused the appellant of raping her under a false promise of marriage. Noteworthy is the complainant's marital status - she was already married and a mother - which played a critical role in the court's assessment.

Justice Rajesh Bindal, in delivering the judgment, scrutinized the maturity and comprehension of the complainant. He remarked, "She was a grown-up lady about ten years elder to the appellant... matured and intelligent enough to understand the consequences of her actions." The case was analyzed in light of the previous judgment in Naim Ahamed v. State (NCT of Delhi), which dealt with similar circumstances.

The Court noted discrepancies in the complainant's statements, especially regarding her divorce and subsequent marriage claims with the appellant. These inconsistencies were crucial in determining the nature of the alleged consent.

Concluding its findings, the Supreme Court quashed FIR No.52 dated 11.12.2020, registered at the Mahila Thana, District Satna (M.P.), along with all subsequent proceedings, underscoring the nuances in the concept of consent in cases of sexual offenses.

Date of Decision: March 6, 2024

XXXX vs State of Madhya Pradesh & Another

Latest Legal News