Headmaster makes false promises and rapes teacher

NP NEWS 24 ONLINE:     Indian Courts have been confronted several times with the question “whether sexual intercourse with any girl on a false ‘promise of marriage’ is consent or not? If not Rape, is it ‘cheating’ or not?

An unpleasant incident took place in Jaipur, after 35-year-old Binod Sethy who acted as the headmaster in-charge of the high school at Sundaria was arrested on 3rd February on the basis of the teacher’s complaint under the charges of rape.

Umakanta Nayak, inspector-in-charge of Dharmasala police station said that according to the complaint lodged by the woman, the accused had been in a physical relationship with her for the past three years after promising to marry her.

“Later, he went back on his promise and assaulted the woman on Saturday when she asked him to keep his word,” Nayak said.

When the woman screamed for help after being assaulted, her colleagues rescued her and admitted her to a community health center (CHC).

The teacher lodged a complaint with the police after she was discharged from the hospital on 2nd February.

Acting on the complaint, Dharmasala police registered a case and arrested the accused teacher.

Section 90 of the Indian Penal Code concludes that “The failure to keep the promise at a future uncertain date due to reasons not very clear on the evidence does not always amount to a misconception of fact at the inception of the act itself. In order to come within the meaning of misconception of fact, the fact must have immediate relevance. The matter would have been different if the consent was obtained by creating a belief that they were already married. In such a case the consent could be said to result from a misconception of fact. But here the fact alleged is a promise to marry we do not know when. If a full-grown girl consents to the act of sexual intercourse on a promise of marriage and continues to indulge in such activity until she becomes pregnant it is an act of promiscuity on her part and not an act induced by the misconception of fact. S. 90 IPC cannot be called in aid in such a case to pardon the act of the girl and fasten criminal liability on the other unless the Court can be assured that from the very inception the accused never really intended to marry her.”

In 2013, Justice R V Easwar quoted that “Having sexual relations with a woman against her will or without her consent also amounts to rape under the IPC. If the consent was obtained on a false assurance or promise of marriage, the consent cannot be considered to be full and free and it would be a case of rape.”

According to a report, 45 percent (339) of the rape cases were related to ‘false promise of marriage’ while 242 cases were actual sexual assault, 137 cases were booked under elopement and 21 cases came under consensual relationship.