SUKHAMAY MANNA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE opposite party No. 2 lodged an FIR with the O. C. Ramnagar p. S. alleging that in course of her study in the college she came to be acquainted with the petitioner. They are developed intimacy between the two. The petitioner assured of marriage with her then on such assurance he co-habited with her on 17th July, 2004. She asked her for settlement of marriage3. On different pretexts the petitioner did not positively respond and then finally she declined to marry her thus she has been raped by deception. Investigation was carried out and the police submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner under Section 376 of the I. P. C.

(2.) MR. Debabrata Roy, learned Advocate for the petitioner referred to the following decisions: (1) Partho Pratim Phukan @ Meja v. The State of West Bengal and Anr. , reported in 2008 (1) C Cr LR (Cal) 774, (2)Shyamapada Tewari v. State of West Bengal, reported in 2009 (1) C Cr LR (Cal) 266, (3) Sujit Kumar Pati v. Smt. Atasi Singha Mahapatra, reported in 2008 Cal LT 375 (HC), (4) Pradeep Kumar @ Pradeep Kumar Verma v. State of Bihar and Anr. , reported in 2007 (3) SCC (Cri) 407.

(3.) IT is submitted with reference to the decisions as aforesaid that whether the lady, not an ordinary one voluntarily subjected herself to sexual intercourse he does not come under the concept of 'misconception of fact'. It is submitted that charge under Section 417 of the Cr. P. C. might be appropriate in the case and he has no objection in the trial Court proceeding with the said charge, but no charge under Section 376 I. PC. cannot be sustained. Therefore, the proceeding under Section 376 I. PC. is sought to be quashed.