Table of contents

Introduction

Database of Abhishek Chouhan s/o Kailash Chouhan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

•   Coram
•   Bench
•   Title of the case
•   Citation
•   Counsel for petitioners
•   Counsel for the respondents
•   Date of order

Grounds of bail

Petitioner contentions

Respondents

Judgement

Critical analyses

Conclusion

Introduction

In the case of Abhishek Chouhan s/o Kailash Chouhan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Applicant’s filed bail application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of bail during the trial, on the ground that the prosecutrix entered into physical relationship with the applicant on her own free will therefore, it cannot be said that applicant has committed rape upon her. However, Madhya Pradesh High Court have rejected this bail application and denied to grant bail to the applicant on the ground that applicant made a false promise to get physically involved with the girl and also held that India been a traditional holding society don’t permits such relationships, these relationships are still taboo in Indian Society therefore, unmarried girls should not indulge in carnal activities until there is an assurance of marriage.

Grounds of bail

The applicant has been in jail since 04.06.2021. The applicant filed a bail application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of bail during the trial. The allegation against the applicant is that he committed rape on the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage. The applicant is implicated in connection with Crime No.489/2021 registered at Police Station- Mahakaal, DistrictUjjain (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 376, 376(2)(N), 366 of the I.P.C. and under Sections 3, 4,5-I, 6 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Act. The prosecutrix entered into a physical relationship with the applicant on her own free will as she is aged around 21 years. Hence, he has not committed rape on her. Therefore, making him eligible to get bail. 

Petitioner contentions

The applicant contends that the applicant and the prosecutrix had an affair since last around two years and both of them are students. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix entered into a physical relationship with the applicant on her own free will as she is aged around 21 years and has falsely stated that the incident took place around three years ago, only under the pressure of prosecutrix’ family members. Counsel has further submitted that the parents of the prosecutrix and the applicant were opposed to their marriage as both of them are from different religion as the applicant is a Hindu whereas the prosecutrix is a Muslim. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that the applicant has committed rape on the prosecutrix.

Respondents

Counsel for the State, has opposed the prayer and it is submitted that no case for grant of bail is made out as the applicant has repeatedly committed rape on the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage since October 2018 and subsequently he refused to marry her and informed her on 1.6.2021 at around 12 o’clock in the night that his marriage is fixed to some other place and hence he cannot marry her as a result of which led the prosecutrix to attempt to commit suicide by consuming phenyl and this fact is also disclosed in her dying declaration dated 2.6.2021 but fortunately she survived.

Database of case Abhishek Chouhan s/o Kailash Chouhan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Judgement

It is held by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh that, in majority of the cases of rape, the defence of the accused is that the prosecutrix was a consenting party and in most of the cases the accused gets the benefit of doubt also, but in the considered opinion of this Court, barring some exceptions, India are a conservative society, it has not yet reached such level (advance or lower) of civilization where unmarried girls, regardless of their religion, indulge in carnal activities with boys just for the fun of it, unless the same is backed by some future promise/assurance of marriage and to prove her point, it is not necessary every time for a victim to try to commit suicide as in the present case.

The prosecutrix has tried to commit suicide which apparently shows that she was serious about the relationship and it cannot be said that she entered into the relationship only for enjoyment. It is also held that, a boy who is entering into a physical relationship with a lass must realize that his actions have consequences and should be ready to face the same as it is the girl who is always at the receiving end because it is she who runs the risk of being pregnant and also her ignominy in the society, if her relationship is disclosed.

Critical analyses

This order by the Madhya Pradesh High Court has highlighted the concept of the court that Indian society is still a conservative society. Marriage is a religious institution in India unlike western countries Indian society does not accept the physical relationship between male and female without the knot of marriage. This order has totally neglected the view of Live-in relationships which have been adopted by our young generation and have been increasing nowadays. However, the approach of judiciary towards live-in relationship has been changing. Kerala High Court also held that under Juvenile Justice Act Child born in Live-in Relationship to be constructed as child born to married couple. Also held that live-in couple had the right of restoration, the Bench ruled that the parental right of biological parents is a natural right not preconditioned by institutionalization of legal marriage.

However, another side of the coin can be seen from High court of Punjab and Haryana judgement where it has held that no protection as claimed can granted, if such protection is granted then the entire social fabric of the society would get disturbed. Hence, no ground to grant the protection is made out. Hon’ble court also held that Parents cannot compel a child to live a life on their terms and that every adult individual has a right to live his or her life as he or she deems fit, therefore High Court upheld a couple’s right to be in a live in relationship. Now consider the irony of the entire scenario on one hand they are providing right to be in live-in relationship but on another hand they are denying protection of law to all those couples who are in live-in relationship.

Conclusion

This Madhya Pradesh High Court order held that the unmarried girls should not indulge in carnal activities until assurance of marriage because India are a conservative society, it has not yet reached such level (advance or lower) of civilization where unmarried girls, regardless of their religion, indulge in carnal activities with boys just for the fun of it.