Girl maintaining sexual relation with married person can not claim that she was raped on promise of marriage

Thus, from the statement of the prosecutrix and her

parents it is found that the prosecutrix and accused were in
love and having relationship for the last four years. During
this period the prosecutrix had physical relations with the
accused. She lived with the accused in his house openly for
long time.
9. Prosecutrix and accused are residents of same village.
Accused was living with his wife and children in his house.
Prosecutrix in cross-examination para 14 admitted that she
had visited the house of accused and met his mother and
wife also. The statement of prosecutrix that the accused had
introduced his wife to her as maid servant, does not inspire
confidence. It is not possible that in the same village, where
prosecutrix and accused are living since birth, prosecutrix
could not get information of the fact that the accused was a
married person having children. During four years of
relationship, it is not stated by the prosecution witnesses
when prosecutrix or her parents asked the accused or his
parents for marriage of prosecutrix with the accused. There
is not even a whisper that they approached the respondent or
his family members for marrying the prosecutrix. If
prosecutrix was having relationship with the accused on
promise of marriage, then it would be natural for her to make
demand of performance of marriage within reasonable time.
For four years not making any demand for marriage is not
natural. Thus the conduct of the prosecutrix creates doubt on
her evidence.

10. The finding of the trial Court in the present case is
correct that the prosecutrix was aware that the respondent
was already married person.It is not proved that accused had
concealed the fact of his marriage from prosecutrix. The
prosecutrix made sexual relations with the
respondent/accused knowingly that he was a married person.
It is not believable that the accused gave a false promise to
marry her and persuaded her to make sexual relationship
with him. It is also not proved that consent of prosecutrix has
been obtained by misrepresentation and misconception of
facts. Prosecutrix is a major woman, competent to give
consent as per her will. For the offence of rape, it is
necessary to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the sexual
intercourse was committed against her will or without her
consent.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR
Misc. Criminal Case No.22431 of 2015

State of Madhya Pradesh
Vs
Gulab Chand Kahar
Present : Hon. Shri Justice S.K.Gangele
 Hon. Shri Justice Anurag Shrivastava

O R D E R
(8.3.2017)

#rape