Subsequent marriage with victim will not absolve accused of rape charge: Delhi High Court [Read Order]

The Delhi High Court recently ruled that rape charges cannot be waived off only on account of the alleged rapist subsequently marrying the victim [Gaurav vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.].The Court pointed out that 'rape' is a serious offence and that no amount of compromise between the parties is sufficient to quash the FIR or waive off the punishment for rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)..Rape by a False Promise to Marry: A case-law non-offence.A single-judge Justice Mukta Gupta of the Delhi High Court observed,."Subsequent marriage between prosecutrix and the accused does not waive off the offence as alleged by the complainant committed earlier and the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code being a serious offence cannot be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties.".The order was passed in a plea seeking to quashing of a First Information Report (FIR) that was registered under Sections 376 (punishment for rape) and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) of the IPC..Advocate Anil Kumar Sharma, appearing for the accused, argued that the FIR was lodged on the basis of a 'confusion'. It was alleged in the FIR that the accused had committed forcible penetrative sexual assault on the prosecutrix/ victim after taking her into a hotel room, despite her refusal..The prosecutrix had alleged in the FIR that she had agreed to intercourse with the accused only after they got married. However, the accused did not pay any heed to this and proceeded with commission of the offence, the complaint said..Whether Sexual Intercourse based on promise to marry is rape? Supreme Court answers.Later, however, the accused married the prosecutrix and started living with her. Thereafter, he moved a plea in the Court to quash the previous FIR registered against him..The Court, however, refused to quash the FIR, finding that no grounds were made out to do the same. The accused man's plea was, therefore, dismissed..The State was represented by Additional Standing Counsel Avi Singh..[Read order]