Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasized the misuse of rape charges when relationships sour and concluded that continuing the case would be an abuse of process in Biswajyoti Chatterjee vs. State of West Bengal & Anr.Criminal Appeal (SLP (Crl.) No. 4261 of 2024) | Decided on 07 April 2025
Supreme Court Judgment Summary: Biswajyoti Chatterjee vs. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Criminal Appeal (SLP (Crl.) No. 4261 of 2024) | Decided on 07 April 2025
Key Facts:
-
Appellant: Biswajyoti Chatterjee, a retired Civil Judge (Senior Division), City Civil Court, Calcutta.
-
Respondent No. 2: A woman who alleged that Chatterjee promised to marry her, maintained a relationship with her, and later abandoned her after her divorce.
-
FIR filed on 14.12.2015 under Sections 376 (rape), 417 (cheating), and 506 (criminal intimidation) IPC.
-
Allegations include:
-
Promise to marry after her divorce.
-
Financial support for her and her son.
-
Sexual relationship allegedly based on promise of marriage.
-
Threats after she tried to contact him post-divorce.
-
Lower Court Proceedings:
-
Anticipatory Bail: Granted by Calcutta High Court in 2016.
-
Charge Sheet: Filed in 2020 by CID, West Bengal.
-
Discharge Application: Dismissed by Sessions Court and later by Calcutta High Court in 2024.
-
The High Court held that there was prima facie material to proceed with the trial.
Supreme Court Decision:
-
Key Observations:
-
Relationship lasted over a year and appeared consensual.
-
Complainant was a mature adult, aware of appellant’s marital status and social standing.
-
No evidence of fraudulent inducement or coercion.
-
Promise of marriage was not made in bad faith; hence, no “misconception of fact” under Section 375 IPC.
-
Alleged threats lacked credible proof to sustain charges under Section 506 IPC.
-
Contradictions in complainant’s statement regarding the role of Advocate Gopal Dass cast doubt on her narrative.
-
Legal Precedents Cited:
-
Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra: Consent must be active and reasoned; false promise must exist at time of act.
-
Uday v. State of Karnataka: Mature individual’s consensual act, even under a broken promise to marry, doesn’t amount to rape.
-
CBI v. Aryan Singh: Discharge stage not meant for detailed trial; only prima facie case is to be considered.
Final Verdict:
-
Appeal allowed.
-
High Court order dated 23.02.2024 is set aside.
-
All criminal proceedings quashed.
-
The Supreme Court emphasized the misuse of rape charges when relationships sour and concluded that continuing the case would be an abuse of process.
Comments
Post a Comment