Sexual intercourse under false promise of marriage
IPC, Section 417 – When a woman is induced to part with her chastity or virginity, which is the most valued possession of hers, theperson, who so induces the woman by making false representation, would be liable for punishment under section 417, IPC if the victim’s having sexual intercourse, with such a person, causes or is likely to cause harm to her body, mind or reputation, for insuch a case unless so deceived, the victim would not have permitted sexual act by the accused.
Bipul Medhi v. State of Assam 2008CriL.J 1099, (2007) 2 GLR 200
“when an accused makes a false promise to marry, which he never intends to carry out, and induces thereby the victim, so deceived, to have with him sexual act, which the victim would not have indulged in or permitted, had she been induced by such deception and when such act of having sexual intercourse by her with the accused causes, or is likely to cause, damage or harm to her body, mind or reputation, the act of the accused would amount to cheating. Thus, when a woman is induced to part with her chastity or virginity, which is the most valued possession of hers, theperson, who so induces the woman by making false representation, would be liable for punishment under section 417, IPC if the victim’s having sexual intercourse, with such a person, causes or is likely to cause harm to her body, mind or reputation, for insuch a case unless so deceived, the victim would not have permitted sexual act by the accused. To put it differently, had such a victim not been deceived, she would not have permitted sexual act or would have refrained from allowing such sexual act and clearly in such a case, but for her permitting such sexual act, she would not have suffered harm to her body, mind or reputation. Since, the definition of the offence of cheating indicates as already pointed out above, that even when no parting of property is occasioned by deception , the deception may still amount to cheating it as a result of the deception, a woman does anything or omits to do anything, which she would not have, but for such deception, done or omitted to do, it logically follows that when an accused, not intending to marry a woman, induces the woman, so deceived, to have sexual intercourse with him or induces such a woman to omit from resisting the act of sexual intercourse by him with her, the act of the accused of having sexual intercoursewith such a woman would amount to offence of cheating if the act of the woman in letting such a man have sexual intercourse with her or the act of the woman in omitting to resist the act of sexual intercourse by such a man with her causesor is likely to cause damage orharm to the person of such a woman, her mind or reputation.”
