Justice jegathees chandra —order — Breach of trust cannot be equated to false promise to marry: HC

Chennai: Observing that the trial court had rightly held that the prosecution has failed to prove from beginning that the accused had intended to cheat her and had no intention to marry her, Justice AD Jagadish Chandira, said “In this case, the appellant (prosecutrix) and accused were having relationship for about one and half years and the relationship which originated in a love affair, developed over a period of time but marriage could not fructify because they belonged to different linguistic and communal group. It seems to be a case of breach of promise rather than a case of false promise to marry. Further there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that at the initial stage itself the accused had no intention whatsoever of, keeping his promise to marry and that the false promise was made only to satisfy the lust,” the court held.

Further, the court also pointed out that in the first complaint given by the woman to Kerala Police there had been no whisper about any kind of sexual intercourse between her and accused. “She had only stated that they were in love with each other and had wanted the police to see that they get married. Immediately, based on complaint the accused and his father were called to police station for enquiry and the father was adamantly against the marriage. It is evidence of the prosecutrix that father of the accused had even threatened to commit suicide, if police arranged for the marriage between them,” the court pointed out.

It further held, “Even assuming there had been sexual intercourse between them, the evidence of the victim does not disclose that the accused had intention to cheat her right from the beginning and that the promise of marriage was made only to satisfy his lust. However, from the evidence it is seen that the marriage could not fructify in the above circumstances beyond his control, ” the court added while noting that even the woman from the beginning had held that the accused had informed her that there was objection from his family for the marriage. “The prosecutrix being a matured girl was conscious of the consequences,” the court observed while dismissing her appeal.