Consent cannot be called 'Rape' merely on Promise of Marriage, says HC

Recently, the Calcutta High Court was confronted with a troubling question, can a conviction for rape stand when key facts surface only later, and the narrative itself appears riddled with gaps? In a closely contested appeal, the Court delved into the reliability of the prosecution’s case, probing whether omissions and inconsistencies had undermined its very foundation, and in the process, spotlighted the fine balance between allegations of consent and the credibility of evidence placed before a criminal court.

The case stemmed from allegations that the complainant was induced to visit the accused’s residence on the assurance of marriage, where she claimed to have been sexually assaulted and confined for several days. Relying primarily on her testimony, the trial court recorded a conviction and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

However, as the matter progressed, the defence highlighted that the parties were in a prior consensual relationship and had subsequently entered into a marital arrangement, even living together for a period, facts that were not disclosed at the outset and emerged only during cross-examination. The prosecution’s case was further weakened by the absence of independent corroboration and the failure of key witnesses to support the allegations of confinement. Aggrieved by the conviction, the accused approached the High Court in appeal, bringing the matter under judicial scrutiny.

Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das observed that the prosecution’s case was riddled with contradictions, material omissions, and a lack of corroboration. The Court noted that the complainant herself admitted to filing the case following marital discord, and that the concealment of the marriage in the complaint cast a serious shadow on its credibility. It also found no substantive evidence to establish that consent, if any, was obtained through deception or misconception of fact.

The Court observed that “the complaint has been lodged out of grudge… after marriage, the accused did not lead conjugal life with her.” With witnesses failing to support the narrative, medical evidence remaining inconclusive, and the foundational facts themselves appearing uncertain, the Court held that the prosecution had failed to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Consequently, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the accused was discharged from his bail bonds.

Case Title: Mithun Paul Vs. The State of West Bengal

Case No.: CRA 76 of 2009

Coram: Hon’ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das

Advocate for the Appellant: Adv. Tannistha Bandyopadhyay

Advocate for the Respondent: Adv. Sujata Das

Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com