Source: hindustantimes.com<\/p>\n\n\n\n
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has said that \u201cjilting a lover, however abhorrent that it may seem to some, is also not an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Vibhu Bakhru made the observation while hearing a case in which the state (Delhi police) had challenged an order of the trial court of July 17 this year acquitting a man who was accused of raping a woman on the pretext of marrying her.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt is important to bear in mind that two consenting adults establishing a physical relationship, is not a crime. Jilting a lover, however abhorrent that it may seem to some, is also not an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code (IPC),\u201d the court said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The court, while acquitting the accused, said, \u201c\u2026the prosecutrix claims that her consent was not voluntary but was obtained by inducing her on the pretext of a promise to marry. Plainly, this is not established in this case\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The single-judge bench said that the woman, after three months of the first alleged incident of rape, voluntarily checked into a hotel with the accused. It said that the couple checked in the hotel at about on 10 PM on September 8, 2016 and checked out the next day which was a \u201cvoluntary act\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThere is no merit in the contention that this act was induced by a promise of marriage,\u201d the court said in its order dated September 25.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The judge also said that the prosecution appears to have used the allegation of inducement of physical relationship on the promise of marriage, to not only justify her physical relationship with the accused in the past, but also her conduct after the FIR was filed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe prosecutrix had refused an internal medical examination. In her testimony, she had explained that she had done so because the accused had contacted her and again reiterated his promise to get married to her,\u201d the judge said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It upheld the order of the trial court acquitting the accused and stated that there is no infirmity in the decision of the lower court judge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The woman had alleged that she was raped on the false pretext of marriage in 2016 and then refused to marry her.<\/p>\n