A MBA student was sentenced for seven years by a Delhi court for raping his live-in partner on the pretext of marriage.
Hari Mohan Sharma (31) was fined Rs 5,000 and held guilty by additional sessions judge Yogesh Khanna, in which he directed the secretary, Delhi Legal Service Authority, New Delhi, for deciding the quantum of compensation to be awarded.
Sharma, from Uttar Pradesh, was accused by his partner, a law student, of raping her several times between December 2010 and January 2011. Police said the woman had lodged a complaint in August 2011 when she became pregnant and Sharma refused to marry her, saying his parents were against her.
Sharma had denied the rape allegation against him during the trial and said he has been falsely implicated. However, on the day of conviction the court rejected Sharma’s plea noting that ‘the intention of the accused, right from the beginning, was never honest and he kept on promising her that he would marry her’.
The court had earlier said, while reserving the order that a live-in affair is not just about residing together, but commitment as well. ‘Concept of live-in relationship does not mean merely residing together. Rather, it means to live with a commitment or in a relation of being together in future,’ the court has said while convicting Sharma.
The court said the accused very well knew that his father would be against the marriage and would not pay his fee but even then he continued to ‘misuse’ the girl till she became pregnant.
Hari Mohan Sharma (31) was fined Rs 5,000 and held guilty by additional sessions judge Yogesh Khanna, in which he directed the secretary, Delhi Legal Service Authority, New Delhi, for deciding the quantum of compensation to be awarded.
Sharma, from Uttar Pradesh, was accused by his partner, a law student, of raping her several times between December 2010 and January 2011. Police said the woman had lodged a complaint in August 2011 when she became pregnant and Sharma refused to marry her, saying his parents were against her.
Sharma had denied the rape allegation against him during the trial and said he has been falsely implicated. However, on the day of conviction the court rejected Sharma’s plea noting that ‘the intention of the accused, right from the beginning, was never honest and he kept on promising her that he would marry her’.
The court had earlier said, while reserving the order that a live-in affair is not just about residing together, but commitment as well. ‘Concept of live-in relationship does not mean merely residing together. Rather, it means to live with a commitment or in a relation of being together in future,’ the court has said while convicting Sharma.
The court said the accused very well knew that his father would be against the marriage and would not pay his fee but even then he continued to ‘misuse’ the girl till she became pregnant.