In the case of Prashant v. State of NCT of Delhi [2024 INSC 879], the Supreme Court observed that the mere breakdown of a relationship between a consenting couple cannot lead to the initiation of criminal proceedings for rape.
Case Background
The complainant lodged an FIR alleging that she had been sexually exploited under a false promise of marriage. She further alleged that the accused had forced her into sexual relations and threatened to harm her family if she did not continue the physical relationship.
Observations of the Court
The Supreme Court emphasized that a relationship that was consensual at its inception cannot be characterized as “criminal” simply because it did not eventually result in marriage.
The Court found the victim’s allegations to be inconsistent with her conduct. It noted several key factors:
- Continued Association: The victim continued to meet and associate with the accused even after the alleged instances of “forced” sexual encounters.
- Nature of Consent: The behavior of the parties indicated that the relationship was entirely consensual throughout its duration.
- Fructification of Marriage: The court held that the failure of a relationship to culminate in marriage does not automatically convert past consensual acts into the offence of rape.
Differentiating False Promise from Breach of Promise
The critical factor that differentiates false promise from breach of promise is the intention of the accused at the time the promise was made.
- False Promise (Criminal): If the accused made the promise solely to obtain sexual gratification, with no intention to marry from the very beginning, it is considered a “misconception of fact” and can attract a rape charge.
- Breach of Promise (Not Criminal): If the accused made the promise in good faith but later could not fulfill it due to unforeseen circumstances such as family opposition, compatibility issues, or a change of heart, it is a simple breach of promise and not rape.
In Conclusion
The judgment reinforces the principle that the criminal machinery should not be used as a tool for retribution following a personal breakup.
For an act to constitute rape under the guise of a false promise of marriage, there must be evidence that the accused had no intention of fulfilling the promise from the very beginning.
