Married Woman Cannot Claim rape on false promise of marriage: PHHC Reiterates

The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the acquittal of a man accused of sexual assault, ruling that the initial onus to establish a lack of consent remains strictly on the prosecution. The Court reiterated that an already married woman living separately from her husband without a divorce cannot claim rape on false promise of marriage. 

A division bench of Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj and Justice Sukhvinder Kaur dismissed an appeal filed by the prosecutrix against a trial court order acquitting the respondent-accused of rape charges. 

Consent and Rape on False Promise of Marriage 

The Punjab and Haryana High Court analyzed the law surrounding consent under Section 375 of the IPC and the interplay of legal presumptions. The High Court held that for consent to be vitiated under a misconception of fact, the promise of marriage must be demonstrated to be false from its inception, made in bad faith without any intention to fulfill it. Referencing the principles laid down in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra and another ( "(2019) SCC online SC 1073": 2019 CaseBase(SC) 2769) and Uday Vs. State of Karnatka ( "2003(2) R.C.R. (Crimina) page 99 SC": 2003 CaseBase(SC) 618), the bench observed that voluntary sexual relationships between consenting adults cannot be routinely converted into criminal offences upon a subsequent breakdown of relations. 

The Punjab and High Court, in its reasoning, observed: "To establish whether the 'consent' was vitiated by a 'misconception of fact' arising out of a promise of marriage must have been a false promise, given in bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was given. The false promise itself must be of immediate relevance, or bear a direct nexus to the woman's decision to engage in the sexual act." 

Legal Presumption and Role of Prosecution 

Addressing the statutory presumption under Section 114-A of the Indian Evidence Act, the Court clarified that the initial burden to establish the basic ingredients of the offence rests entirely on the prosecution. Relying on Tukaram and another Vs. The State of Maharashtra, the bench reiterated that prosecution cases must stand on their own legs and cannot leverage weaknesses in the defense. 

Background 

The complainant, a mother of two children, was living separately from her husband, who was incarcerated in drug-related cases, without securing a legal divorce. She subsequently met the accused and entered into a live-in relationship, alleging that he engaged in physical relations with her under the pretext of marriage before breaking contact. 

Following investigation under Section 173(2) of the Cr.P.C., the accused was charged under Section 376 of the IPC. The trial court acquitted the accused after finding material improvements in the victim's testimony and noticing the absence of evidence establishing rape on false promise of marriage. Upholding the trial court's order, the Punjab and Haryana High Court cited Sadhu Saran Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others ( "2016 (2) RCR (Criminal) 319": 2016 CaseBase(SC) 430) to reiterate that orders of acquittal should not be interfered with unless infected with clear perversity. 

Case Details: 

Case No.: CRA-AD-136-2022 (O&M) 

Case Title: Gurmeet Kaur v. Gagandeep Singh @ Gaggi and another 

Appearances: 

For the Petitioner(s): Ms. Harmanpreet Kaur, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel) 

For the Respondent(s): Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG, Punjab 

Source: 2026 CaseBase(PNH) 4628