In Ramachandran @ Chandran v. State of Kerala, the Kerala High Court acquitted the accused who was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of ₹50,000 for having sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix based on the promise of marriage and thereby, amounting to rape under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Factual Matrix
The accused and the prosecutrix were in love for more than 10 years. The prosecutrix alleged that she and the accused married each other on 03.04.2014 at Manarcaud Temple and thereafter, stayed in a lodge at Thekkady and had sexual intercourse. When the prosecutrix went to the accused’s home, his mother had a quarrel with her and did not accept her. Later, on 05.04.2014, they again had sexual intercourse.
Thereafter, the accused and the prosecutrix went to the house of the prosecutrix to stay there. At the house of prosecutrix, they had sexual intercourse for the last time.
It is the case of the prosecutrix that the accused had sexual intercourse with her thrice and obtained her consent to sexual intercourse on the basis of his promise of marriage.
Understanding the consent of a woman on a promise to marry
In a sexual act, if both parties understand the nature of such sexual relationship well, it is implicit that both parties consented to it. The Court noted that the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 with respect to rape, are not gender neutral. It was therefore, suggested that the understanding of the consent should be related to the dominant and subordinate relationship in a sexual act.
Consent on Misconception of Fact
The Court distinguished between a sexual relationship established on the false promise of marriage and subsequent breach of promise to marry by making reference to the decisions in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra and another, Anurag Soni v. State of Chattisgarh, Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana, Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar (Dr.) v. State of Maharashtra and Others, and State of Uttar Pradesh v. Naushad.
The act of obtaining consent to sexual intercourse on false promise of marriage is said to be committed when the promise was not made in good faith and no intention of being adhered to when it was made. Whereas a subsequent breach of promise to marry is made when the accused initially intended to marry the prosecutrix but unable to do so due to change of circumstances.
Ostensible consent and sexual autonomy
The Kerala High Court made a notable observation that when material facts that can affect the consent of a woman are known to the accused and the accused chooses not to disclose such facts, he is said to have violated the decisional autonomy of the victim to engage in any sexual act.
It was further clarified that if the accused was not certain about the marriage, such fact should be disclosed to the woman.
Failure to disclose facts in either of the aforementioned cases amounts to consent based on misconception of fact and therefore, would be vitiated.
Other High Courts- Whether sex on promise of marriage amounts to rape?
The Court noted the failure of the prosecutrix to prove the false promise or consent was obtained by non-disclosure of material facts and the resistance of the parents of the accused to accept marriage between the two without dowry. The Court concluded that the accused committed the sexual act with genuine intention to marry the prosecutrix and it was later, he breached such promise due to resistance from his family. The Court thereafter pronounced that the accused be given benefit of doubt and therefore, acquitted of the offence of rape under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
