UNI

New Delhi, Oct 2: Delivering a verdict with wide ranging ramifications for victims of false promises, the Supreme Court has held that consent for sexual intercourse obtained by fraud from the victim is not a consent and cannot condone the offence of rape.

A 16-year-old village girl for three months resisted the advances made by the appellant Yedla Srinivasa Rao, eventually succumbing to them and had sexual intercourse after being promised of marriage, resulting in pregnancy.

Village Panchyat was convened where the convict expressed his resolve for marriage again this time within two days but did not turn up and absconded.

The trial court acquitted the accused but the state appealed in Andhra Pardesh High Court which vide its judgment dated June 18, 2004 indicted the appellant for the offence of rape and fraud and sentenced him to seven years' imprisonment with a fine of Rs 100.

Bench comprising Mr Justice A K Mathur and Mr Justice Altamas Kabir in its judgment dated September 29, said''In the present case in view of the facts as mentioned above we are satisfied that the consent obtained was not a voluntary one and given under a misconception and therefore cannot deemed consent in law.

This is evident from the testimony of PW1 and PW6 functioning as Panchayat where the accused admitted to having sexual intercourse and promising to marry but he reneged on his promise. He later reiterated his pledge before the Panchayat lending credence to the supposition that the accused had no intention to marry her right from the beginning and committed sexual intercourse entirely by deceit.

Therefore, we are satisfied that the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant is correct and no case is made out for our interference. The appeals are dismissed.''