‘Consensual sex on broken marriage promise not rape’

Update: 2025-10-31 18:46 GMT

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has held that an unfulfilled promise to marry cannot by itself convert a consensual relationship between adults into rape unless it is proved that the promise was false from the very beginning and made with mala fide intent.

Justice Prasenjit Biswas made the observation while allowing an appeal and setting aside the conviction of a man accused of raping a woman in 1994 on the pretext of marriage.

The court found that the prosecution had failed to establish absence of consent and could not prove that the accused had intentionally misled the complainant with a false promise.

The complainant, who was over 20 years old at the time, stated that she had developed a physical relationship with the accused and that their association continued for several years.

The court noted that she did not immediately raise any allegation and maintained contact with the man for a long period after the alleged incident.

This, the judge observed, weakened the claim of coercion and supported the defence case of a consensual relationship.

“The silence and inaction of the victim for a considerable period following the alleged occurrence cast grave suspicion on the veracity of her allegations,” the judgment stated.

The High Court also pointed out that the prosecution had failed to produce medical evidence to substantiate the claim that the complainant became pregnant or that an abortion was induced. The alleged supplier of herbal medicine for the abortion was not examined, leaving that part of the prosecution’s case uncorroborated.

Emphasising the legal principle, the court said that a mere breach of a promise cannot constitute rape unless the intention to deceive existed from the outset.

“Disappointment or breach of expectation, by itself, cannot be construed to mean that the accused had committed the offence of rape,” the court observed.

Setting aside the conviction, the court directed that the appellant be discharged from his bail bond unless required in any other case. It also instructed him to execute a fresh bond under Section 437A of the CrPC to ensure appearance if called within six months.

Similar News