Delhi court convicts man for rape on pretext of marriage

A Delhi court has convicted a man for repeatedly raping a woman after luring her into a relationship with the false assurance of marriage, saying that the assurance was “false” and driven by “clandestine motives to satisfy his lust”.

Additional Sessions Judge Kapil Kumar was hearing a case against Mohit Rajpal, who was accused of having physical relations with a woman on the pretext of marriage and said that such consent cannot be considered legally valid.

In an order dated April 9, the court said, “It is proved that the promise of marriage extended by the accused to prosecutrix was a false promise to marriage and made with clandestine motives to satisfy his lust without having any intention to honour the same since inception”.

According to the prosecution, the accused established physical relations with the woman from 2016 to 2018 by falsely assuring her of marriage. A case was registered against the accused under IPC Sections 376(2) (aggravated rape), 377 (unnatural offences), 313 (carrying miscarriage without consent) and 506 (criminal intimidation).

The court noted that the promise was dishonest from the outset and was used as a tool to obtain her consent.

“The false promise to marriage extended by the accused was the sole reason for the prosecutrix to consent to repeated physical relations with the accused,” the judge said.

The survivor had alleged that the accused also subjected her to forced sexual acts, coerced her into terminating a pregnancy, and threatened her with dire consequences if she took legal action.

“The consent of prosecutrix for physical relations proved not to be free consent, being vitiated for the misconception of fact in her mind consequent to false promise to marriage extended to her by accused,” the court said.

The court reiterated the settled legal position that a conviction in sexual offence cases can be based solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix if it is found to be credible and trustworthy.

Rejecting the defence argument that the relationship was consensual, the court held that consent obtained on a false promise of marriage does not amount to free consent.

The accused had denied the allegations, claiming that the relationship was consensual and that he had been falsely implicated.

He also alleged that the woman attempted to extort money from him.

However, the court found the prosecutrix’s version consistent and reliable.

“It is also proved on record that the accused had specific knowledge that the prosecutrix consented to physical relations with him because of a misconception in her mind for the reason for the promise of marriage extended to her by him,” the court said.

The court acquitted the accused of other charges under Sections 377, 313 and 506 IPC but convicted him for repeated rape. It then listed the matter for a later date to hear arguments on the quantum of the sentence.