CASE NAME	Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana, 2013 (7) SCC 675.
CITATION	AIR 2013 SC 2071, 2013 AIR SCW 2987, AIR 2013 SC (CRIMINAL) 1389, 2014 (1) AJR 265
COURT	Supreme Court of India
BENCH	Hon’ble Justice Dipak Misra, Justice B.S. Chauhan
APPELLANT	Deepak Gulati
RESPONDENT	State of Haryana
DECIDED ON	decided on 20th May, 2013

INTRODUCTION

Rape is widely regarded as the most heinous crime committed against a person in society, both physically and psychologically. It has a profound effect on the victim’s physical and mental health. This does not even need to address the fact that the criminal justice system must handle such horrible crimes with severity, making sure that those who commit them are tried quickly and punished severely in line with the law and the specific facts and circumstances of the case. The Latin word “rapere,” which means “to snatch, to grab, or to carry off,” is where the word “rape” first appeared. Furthermore, “raptus” under Roman law denoted the forcible abduction of a woman, whether or not sexual relations were involved. 

The crime of rape poses a significant threat to India’s legal system and presents difficulties for law enforcement. According to a recent report by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) in 2021, there were 31,677 recorded occurrences of rape nationwide, or an average of 86 cases per day. Rape is the fourth most common crime against women in India. It is crucial to emphasize that the court must handle rape cases involving any sort of previously acknowledged relationship between the parties with extreme caution and sensitivity. To determine whether the accused’s actions are illegal, it is necessary to determine whether the case involves a simple breach of promise, where the accused is unable to fulfill his marriage vow because of his changed circumstances, or whether the accused knowingly made a false promise to marry in order to get the woman’s consent for a sexual act.

It is crucial to emphasize that the court must handle rape cases involving any sort of previously acknowledged relationship between the parties with extreme caution and sensitivity. To determine whether the accused’s actions are illegal, it is necessary to determine whether the case involves a simple breach of promise, where the accused is unable to fulfill his marriage vow because of his changed circumstances, or whether the accused knowingly made a false promise to marry in order to get the woman’s consent for a sexual act.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The prosecutrix, who was 19 years old, and the accused-appellant had personal relationships. He persuaded her to accompany him to Kurukshetra in order to get married, and she consented. He had sex with her on the way to Kurukshetra, despite her will. After that, the appellant brought her to Kurukshetra, where he spent three to four days staying with his relatives and raped her. The appellant additionally claimed that the prosecutrix was dismissed after four days. After that, she spent a few days at one of Kurukshetra University’s dorms. The dormitory warden questioned the prosecutrix after he developed suspicious feelings. Thus, the prosecutrix told the warden about the incident, and the warden told her father. Meanwhile, The prosecutrix left the hostel and went to a temple, where she ran into the appellant again. In this case, the appellant persuaded her to go to Ambala with him so they could get married. They discovered her father and the cops waiting when they arrived at the bus stop.

ISSUES RAISED

Can an accused be held liable for rape if consent is there for women?

Can consent given under the pretext of marriage be considered forced consent, and can the accused be held liable?

ARGUMENTS FROM BOTH SIDES

Argument from the side of the appellant

The prosecutrix did not raise any objections or hums during the act. She was taken behind the bushes, and during sexual intercourse, she did not raise any objection. 

At no point in time has the prosecutrix brought up any grievances with anyone. In fact, it appears that she succumbed to the appellant’s will—possibly in place of his vow to wed her. Therefore, the question of whether the appellant intended to deceive the prosecutrix from the outset when he urged her to travel with him from Karnal to Kurukshetra emerges in the context of the facts and circumstances of the current case. 

Argument from the side of the respondent

The consent for sexual intercourse has been implicitly taken on the pretext of the false promise of marriage. Appellant promised the prosecutrix to marry her and to take her to Ambala, and for that purpose, he took her to his relatives but threw her out on the 4th day.

JUDGMENT

The Honorable Supreme Court noted that the prosecutrix had chosen to marry the appellant and had left her family of her own free will. She could have understood the difficulties and problems surrounding her marriage to the appellant because she was 19 years old at the relevant time. The appellant had provided the prosecutrix his phone number, and she had called him, inquiring as to why he had not met her at the prearranged location. She waited a long time for him as well, and when he did show up she accompanied him to a lake where they had sex. She made no complaints to anyone at this point and did not voice any objections. She voluntarily became intimate with the appellant at other times as well. 

It was additionally noted that the accusation of a “false promise of marriage” was unfounded if the prosecutrix was, in reality, traveling to Ambala to wed the appellant. A claim of dishonesty or rape brought against the appellant was deemed unconvincing after consideration of the relevant facts and circumstances. The conviction and punishments imposed by the lower courts were overturned because the accused was entitled to the benefit of the doubt. 

CONCLUSION

According to Section 114-A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (henceforth referred to as the “Act 1872”), the court will assume that the prosecutrix did not grant her consent if she testifies that she did not. The Act 1872’s Section 114-A should not be put into effect based on the circumstances of this particular instance. Therefore, the only issue at hand is whether or not her assent was acquired under false pretenses of marriage. As a result, in addition to the provisions of Section 90 of the Act 1872, consideration must be given to the provisions of Sections 417, 375, and 376 IPC. Such a physical interaction would constitute rape under Section 90 of the Act 1872, which states that any permission obtained under false pretenses would not be regarded as valid consent for the purposes of Section 375 IPC. 

Consent might be given explicitly or implicitly, misled or compelled, voluntarily or by deception. Consent is a rational act that involves thought and consideration, with the intellect balancing the pros and cons on both sides. There is a big difference between rape and consensual sex, so in this case, the court has to look very closely at whether the accused had a genuine desire to marry the victim or if he had made a false promise to that effect just to sate his lust, since the latter falls under the category of lying or cheating. There is a difference between simply breaking a commitment and keeping a promise that was made in error. 

Therefore, the court must determine if the accused made a false vow to marry at an early age and whether the permission was granted after fully comprehending the nature and repercussions of sexual indulgence. There may be a situation where the prosecutrix consents to sex with the accused because she is passionate and in love with him rather than just because he misled her. Alternatively, there may be a situation where the accused is unable to marry the prosecutrix despite his sincere desire to do so due to uncontrollable or unforeseeable circumstances.
These situations require a different approach. A person cannot be found guilty of rape unless the court determines that the accused had covert motivations and that his purpose was mala fide.