Subsequent Marriage Doesn’t Waive off rape Charges
Table of Content:
- Introduction
- Gaurav vs State (Govt NCT of Delhi)
- Background of the case
- Statutory provisions involved
- Issues raised
- The Decision of the court
- Conclusion
Introduction
Rape was prevailing in our country since ancient times. Rape is considered a heinous crime that affects a women’s dignity and modesty. This offence leaves very deep impressions of it on the victim. Sometimes this offence is also coupled with death. It is a kind of sexual harassment that is considered to be more severe in nature. In India, the offence of Rape is punishable under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 under various sections. Out of these sections section, 376 prescribes punishment for rape.
It is clear from a bare reading of section 376 of the Indian Penal Code that is very severe in nature and therefore there are very few chances to get acquitted from rape and in this respect recently a question was raised before the Delhi High court that if the accused marry the rape victim he can get discharge rape charges? In other words, we can say that whether after the offense of rape has been committed can a marriage between accused and victim be used as a shield for getting a discharge of rape charges?
Gaurav vs State (Govt NCT of Delhi) and Anr.
[W.P. (CRL) 1378/2021]
Background of the case
In this case the rape victim, that is, Respondent No. 2 (name not disclosed) lodged an F.I.R. at Paharganj Police Station under section 376 and 506 of I.P.C against the petitioner of the present case. Respondent No. 2 complained that the petitioner had taken her to a hotel room where he committed a forcible sexual penetrative assault on her. She further added that even though she refused to get involved in sexual activities as she wants to do it after marriage only the petitioner didn’t listen to her and forcibly committed the said offense.
The petitioner by filing the present petition contended that the said F.I.R. lodged by Respondent No. 2 liable to be quashed on the ground that he and Respondent No. 2 have since married and are living together. Further, Advocate Anil Kumar Sharma argued on behalf of the petitioner that the said F.I.R. lodged by the complainant was under confusion and hence it is doubtful and liable to be quashed.
Statutory Provisions Involved
Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
“Punishment for rape.—
(1) Whoever, except in the cases provided for by sub-section (2), commits rape shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may be for life or for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine unless the women raped is his own wife and is not under twelve years of age, in which cases, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both: Provided that the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than seven years.
(2) Whoever,—
(a) Being a police officer commits rape—
(i) Within the limits of the police station to which he is appointed; or
(ii) In the premises of any station house whether or not situated in the police station to which he is appointed; or
(iii) On a woman in his custody or in the custody of a police officer subordinate to him; or
(b)being a public servant, takes advantage of his official position and commits rape on a woman in his custody as such public servant or in the custody of a public servant subordinate to him; or
(c) being on the management or on the staff of a jail, remand home or other place of custody established by or under any law for the time being in force or of a woman’s or children’s institution takes advantage of his official position and commits rape on any inmate of such jail, remand home, place or institution; or
(d) being on the management or on the staff of a hospital, takes advantage of his official position and commits rape on a woman in that hospital; or
(e) Commits rape on a woman knowing her to be pregnant; or
(f) Commits rape on a woman when she is under twelve years of age; or
(g) commits gang rape, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may be for life and shall also be liable to fine: Provided that the Court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment of either description for a term of less than ten years.
Explanation 1.—where a woman is raped by one or more in a group of persons acting in furtherance of their common intention, each of the persons shall be deemed to have committed gang rape within the meaning of this sub-section.
Explanation 2.—“Women’s or children’s institution” means an institution, whether called an orphanage or a home for neglected woman or children or a widows’ home or by any other name, which is established and maintained for the reception and care of woman or children.
Explanation 3.—“Hospital” means the precincts of the hospital and includes the precincts of any institution for the reception and treatment of persons during convalescence or of persons requiring medical attention or rehabilitation.”
Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
“Whoever commits, the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both; If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc.—And if the threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by fire, or to cause an offence punishable with death or 1[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or to impute, unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.”
Issues Raised
- Whether a subsequent marriage waived off the charges of rape from the accused?
- Whether the F.I.R. in question liable to be quashed on the ground of subsequent marriage?
The decision of the Court
The Delhi High Court held that a subsequent marriage does not become a ground to waive off the charges of rape on account of the alleged rapist. The court stated that the offense committed by the petitioner has come under the category of heinous crimes and therefore such charges cannot be waived off and the said F.I.R is not liable to be quashed on a mere ground that there is a compromise between the parties.
Single judge Bench of Justice Mukta Gupta held that:
“Subsequent marriage between the petitioner and respondent No. 2 does not waive off the offence as alleged by the complainant committed earlier and offence punishable under Section 376 IPC being a serious offence, the FIR in question cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties.”
Hence, the court concluding its judgment by dismissing the present writ petition by mentioning that the court had found nothing to quash the said F.I.R.
Conclusion
It is clear from the Delhi High Court Judgment that if a person committed an offence of rape which is severe in itself then there is no ground to get escape from the consequences even though the accused marry the victim after such an event. The recent judgment passed by the Delhi High Court is justified in itself as everyone has a right to choose their partner for the purpose of marriage and such an offence ultimately left no option for a girl and the subsequent marriage with the accused even led to an increase the pain and sufferings of the victim as she now has to live with the offender and face her day and night which led to deepening her pain and the memory of that incident.