Scribd
Upload
32 views1 page

T 1

The document discusses cases where sexual intercourse obtained on the pretext of marriage was found to not constitute valid consent under Indian law. It summarizes a Supreme Court opinion that a woman's consent based on a man's promise to marry her or belief that he is unmarried is not valid consent. The document concludes that in the described case, the woman's consent was obtained by fraudulent means, so a rape case can be filed against the man.

Uploaded by

OSHI SHRIVASTAVA
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
32 views1 page

T 1

The document discusses cases where sexual intercourse obtained on the pretext of marriage was found to not constitute valid consent under Indian law. It summarizes a Supreme Court opinion that a woman's consent based on a man's promise to marry her or belief that he is unmarried is not valid consent. The document concludes that in the described case, the woman's consent was obtained by fraudulent means, so a rape case can be filed against the man.

Uploaded by

OSHI SHRIVASTAVA
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

<<Oshi Shrivastava>>

Intern at ubAdvocade
Email- oshishrivastava08@gmail.com
Contact No.- 8103232089
It has been discussed in a lot of cases that sexual intercourse on the pretext of
marriage might (depending on different circumstances) fall under the head of
misconception, consent obtained under the impression of which does not amount
to valid consent as stated in section 90 of Indian Penal Code.
The Supreme Court in cases like Yedla Srinivasa Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh,
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Naushad, Anurag Soni v. The State of Chhattisgarh, etc.
stated that when a man indulges in sexual intercourse with a woman with her
consent but that consent is obtained on the basis of a misconception which is that
the man will marry the woman in future, such consent is not a valid consent under
the law as stated in section 90 of IPC.
In the present case the client Sheela was in a relationship with Neeraj, a married
man. Sheela was under the impression that Neeraj was unmarried as he never told
her otherwise and reciprocated her feelings expressly. She verbally expressed her
desire to marry him to which he did not show any sign of denial. The fact that she
enquired about marriage gives a hint that she considered him unmarried. Also,
Neeraj smiled which seemed like an answer in affirmation to Sheela’s question
in the given circumstances. Sheela’s consent to indulge in any such intercourse
was based on the belief that Neeraj would marry her in the future. Since Sheela’s
consent was based on the promise of marriage and of him being a bachelor, the
consent given by Sheela does not amount to valid consent under the law. Neeraj
obtained Sheela’s consent fraudulently by not refuting or negating her question
instead smiling which insisted on him agreeing with her which resulted in Sheela
falling under the misconception that he will marry her someday in future. Under
section 375 of IPC when sexual acts are committed without the woman’s consent
(valid consent) it amounts to rape. Thus, a rape case can be filed against Neeraj.
This opinion is based on the YouTube video https://youtu.be/zGn9AnXBPck_ of
Jeevan Prakash, AOR, Supreme Court.

You might also like