Anurag Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh
Background
The accused and the complainant (prosecutrix), who knew each other and were in a relationship, had physical relations after the accused repeatedly promised to marry her, including inviting her to stay at his residence for a day, during which the relationship occurred despite her initial reluctance. Over the following weeks the accused kept assuring both the complainant and, later, both families that marriage would follow, with a wedding function scheduled and postponed more than once. He ultimately married another woman, to whom (evidence showed) he had effectively been committed well before these events, and the complainant then filed a police complaint. The trial court convicted him under Section 376 IPC and sentenced him to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment; the Chhattisgarh High Court upheld the conviction, leading to this appeal.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court reviewed its own precedents on the distinction between a mere "breach of promise" to marry (not rape) and a "false promise" made with no real intention of marrying, used only to obtain consent (which vitiates consent under Section 90 IPC and can amount to rape). Examining the evidence, including that the accused was already committed to marrying another woman before and during his assurances to the complainant, and that he fled rather than face the families' marriage talks, the Court concluded that from the very inception he never intended to marry her and had used a false promise solely to obtain her consent. It therefore upheld the conviction under Section 376 IPC, rejecting the argument that this was merely consensual sex or an unfulfilled promise. However, taking into account the facts and the minimum sentence prescribed at the time of the offence, the Court reduced the sentence from 10 years' to 7 years' rigorous imprisonment, partly allowing the appeal only to that extent.
Lesson Learnt
Sexual relations obtained through a promise of marriage that the accused never genuinely intended to keep, as opposed to a promise later broken for genuine, unforeseen reasons, can legally amount to rape because the resulting consent is treated as given under a "misconception of fact"; courts examine the person's conduct and circumstances from the outset to tell a false promise from a true one that simply fell through.