Published on: October 6, 2023 at 12:32 IST
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: Anurag Soni V. State of Chhattisgarh (2019)
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that consent based on false pretence would lead to misconception. Honourable Apex Court has invoked the provisions as enshrined under the aegis of Section 90 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 which does not recognises consent if given by a person under fear of injury, or under a misconception of fact, and if the person doing the act knows, or has reason to believe, that the consent was given in consequence of such fear or misconception.
16. In the deposition, the prosecutrix specifically stated that initially she did not give her consent for physical relationship, however, on the appellant’s promise that he would marry her and relying upon such promise, she consented for physical relationship with the appellant-accused.
Even considering Section 114-A of the Evidence Act, which has been inserted subsequently, there is a presumption and the court shall presume that she gave the consent for the physical relationship with the accused relying upon the promise by the accused that he will marry her.
As observed hereinabove, from the very inception, the promise given by the accused to marry the prosecutrix was a false promise and from the very beginning there was no intention of the accused to marry the prosecutrix as his marriage with Priyanka Soni was already fixed long back and, despite the same, he continued to give promise/false promise and alluded the prosecutrix to give her consent for the physical relationship.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra
