Tahir Ansari vs State
- Court
- Delhi High Court
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Date of reserving Judgment: 19 May, 2026
th
Date of Decision: 29 May, 2026
IN THE MATTER OF:
+ CRL.A. 1201/2012
TAHIR ANSARI .....Appellant
Through: Mr. R.P. Pandey and Mr. Prakash
Kumar, Advs.
Appellant-in-person (through V.C.).
versus
STATE .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP for
State with SI Virender, PS Kamla
Market.
Mr. Vignaraj Pasayat, Advocate
(DHCLSC) with Mr. Naman
Aggarwal and Ms. Eishan, Advs. for
victim.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL KUMAR YADAV
JUDGMENT
VIMAL KUMAR YADAV, J.
1. Ashok Aggarwal, an elusive character in the entire episode, who
spilled the beans for Tahir Ansari by reporting the proposed transaction to
police where a young girl was to be sold for some nefarious purpose. Since
the proposed transaction was to take place at the infamous G.B. Road, Delhi,
within the jurisdiction of Police Station Kamla Market, therefore, the
obvious inference was that the girl was to be thrown into flesh trade.
However, Ashok Aggarwal, who seemingly posed himself to be a
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 1 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
prospective buyer, informed the Beat Police Official HC Mahesh (PW-10)
about Tahir Ansari and also pointed out to him. This led to the detention of
the Appellant herein i.e. Tahir Ansari and the victim, both of whom were
taken to Police Station Kamla Market and produced before the SHO
Inspector Surinder Jeet Kaur (PW-12). The statement of the victim i.e. rukka
(Ex.PW-2/A) led to the registration of FIR No. 39/2011 registered under
Section 366, 372, 376 of Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’). The investigation led to
filing of the chargesheet under the aforesaid sections.
2. After the compliance of Section 207 of Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’), based upon the contents of the chargesheet, a formal
charge was framed against Appellant Tahir Ansari under Section 376 IPC.
Trial commenced as the Appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge framed
and that led to the examination of 12 witnesses.
3. In compliance of Section 313 Cr.P.C., statement of the Accused was
recorded, wherein the evidence coming against him was put to him so as to
ascertain his version about it. Expectedly, the Appellant washed off his
hands from the allegations and the evidence by asserting that the prosecutrix
voluntarily accompanied him and what ever happened between two of them,
was consensual. He did not opt to lead evidence in his defence. On
conclusion of the arguments, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC
(Central), Delhi held the Appellant guilty under Section 376 IPC and
awarded a sentence, whereby he was to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment
(RI) for 07 years, in addition to it, pay a fine of Rs. 2,500/-, in default of
which he was to undergo Simple Imprisonment (SI) for 03 months.
4. Against the backdrop of these facts and circumstances, the present
appeal has emerged. However, before dwelling into the intricacies of the
appeal and the arguments, the indispensable facts, precisely are as under.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 2 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
5. The victim belongs to State of Jharkhand and she was brought to the
city of Delhi in June, 2010 by one of her cousin’s namely Barka and she
secured an employment for her, as house-help/maid in the area of Paschim
Vihar in the house of one Smt. Poonam Kalra.
6. In the month of August, 2010, while the prosecutrix was trying to
speak to her relatives in Jharkhand, a wrong number was dialled, which
connected the Appellant herein with the prosecutrix. Thereafter, the
Appellant started making regular calls and that’s how a kind of friendship
developed between the prosecutrix and the Appellant.
7. The Appellant very quickly realised within a span of 15-20 days that
the prosecutrix is the right person for him to marry and expressed his desire
to the prosecutrix. The inducement was enough for the prosecutrix to leave
her employment and she accompanied the Appellant after packing her
belongings that too without informing her employer. He took the prosecutrix
to his rented accommodation in Kapashera area of Delhi, where they started
living as husband and wife.
8. Initial resistance of the prosecutrix to avoid from indulging into sexual
relations were put off by the Appellant forcibly. He kept on having sexual
relations with the prosecutrix under the promise of marriage, but when it
came to formalise the marriage, he kept on avoiding on one pretext or the
other. That’s how some months passed away, during which the Appellant
and the prosecutrix have cordial relationship. However, one fine day, the
prosecutrix heard some sort of transaction involving Rs. 50,000/-, between
the Appellant and some unknown person but she did not pay much attention
to it, little realising that it was she who was being transacted to be thrown in
flesh trade as Appellant was striking a deal to sell her. The truth soon
dawned upon the victim on 12.05.2011 when the Appellant took her to an
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 3 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
unknown place in a TSR. Some days prior to that her photographs were
taken in a Photo Studio and it was told to her that the photographs would be
required for the purpose of court marriage. The same was the answer qua the
telephonic talk with regard to the amount of Rs. 50,000/-. The Appellant
informed that it was about the expenses of the court marriage. The
prosecutrix, on reaching in the area, grew suspicious and enquired about the
place from the TSR driver, who told that this is the infamous G.B. Road area
of Delhi where prostitution is being carried out. This trepidated the victim
and before she could react she saw that the Appellant was apprehended by
the police. Thereafter, she too was taken to the Police Station along with the
Appellant, where her statement was recorded. She narrated the entire details,
as reflected in Ex.PW-2/A.
9. It is contended on behalf of the Appellant that he has been falsely
implicated in this case, inasmuch as everything was consensual and the
prosecutrix being major, therefore, the Appellant cannot be held responsible
for any kind of offence. Had it been so, that she was forcefully detained or
was sexually exploited, she had enough time and opportunities to escape, or
to bring it to the knowledge of the police or neighbours. She despite having
all the opportunities did not make any complaint to anyone. It is further
submitted that the prime witness of the incident, apart from the prosecutrix,
that is, Ashok Aggarwal, who was instrumental in getting the Appellant
arrested, has not been cited as a witness Police. There is nothing in the MLC,
which may reflect that the prosecutrix have been subjected to any forceful
sexual intercourse.
10. Another limb of the argument put forth on behalf of the Appellant is
that the prosecutrix, since she wanted, came back to live with the Appellant
after being allegedly left at railway station. The prosecutrix has a grudge that
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 4 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
Appellant allegedly sold her mobile handset on the pretext of buying train
tickets and thereafter, vanished from the railway station, but she instead of
severing the ties with Appellant, or reporting the matter to police, came back
to the Appellant and joined him voluntarily. This is indicative of the fact that
there was neither any element of force, deception or enticement rather it was
voluntary and consensual that she moved and lived with the Appellant.
11. As and when two views are possible in a given set of facts and
circumstances the one favouring the accused should be adopted, contended
lastly by the counsel for the Appellant.
12. In addition to the aforesaid contentions, it is also submitted on behalf
of the Appellant that out of the sentence of 07 years awarded to him, he has
already undergone 01 year 04 months in custody and keeping in view the
fact that everything was consensual and that he has an old age ailing father
and three younger brothers, who are all dependent upon the Appellant,
therefore, he may be considered for release on the basis of period of custody
already undergone by him.
13. Learned APP for the State, assisted by learned counsel for the
prosecutrix came up with the plea that the Appellant was having evil
intentions from the very beginning as he lured the victim and enticed her to
leave her employer and employment to accompany him. His sole intention
was to take advantage of the prosecutrix. He, while sexually exploiting her
for months together, on the pretext of marriage, which did not come forward
to formalise it. Ultimately, in order to get rid of the prosecutrix, he
conceived another evil design of selling her to some brothel in the notorious
and infamous area of Delhi, where prostitution is rampant i.e. G.B. Road, but
for the fact that the proposed customer of this transaction, the so called
Ashok Aggarwal, proved a nemesis for him.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 5 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
14. It is thus, contended on behalf of the prosecution that the impugned
Judgment is based upon the evidence, which unequivocally points out
towards the guilt of the Accused and, therefore, the appeal is liable to be
dismissed and for that matter, even the sentence is also in consonance with
the act of the Appellant being commensurate and that too is required to be
maintained.
15. The intentions of the Appellant were malafide, from the very
inception as he was quick enough to realise the naivety and vulnerability of
the prosecutrix and offered to marry her within 20 days of telephonic
interaction. Evidently, it was too short a period to reach to such a conclusion
as this is not a case of love at first sight since they had no occasion to be in
front of each other physically. Presuming that he had bonafide intention of
getting married, then he has nothing to explain as to what prevented him
from marrying the prosecutrix in those 08-10 months during which they
were together. He, however, constantly indulged into sexual relations with
the prosecutrix and kept exploiting her. It was nothing but taking the
prosecutrix for a ride on the false promise of marriage and when his lust was
satisfied, he, in order to get rid of the prosecutrix, instead of breaking up the
relationship or leaving the victim, transacted about the prosecutrix to be sold
to some brothel keeper or other individual against consideration of some
money. All these are enough to describe as to what kind of person the
Appellant is.
16. The prosecutrix was so foolish or immature or gullible that despite
the fact that the Appellant ditched her and left her at Railway Station that too
after selling her mobile handset purportedly to arrange money for the ticekts,
the prosecutrix again fell into the trap of the Appellant. She again came back
to the Appellant. The Appellant, in order to finally get rid of the prosecutrix,
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 6 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
attempted to sell her. Evidence to that effect is overwhelmingly present in
the shape of the testimony of the PW-2 victim and the police official from
the area of P.S. Kamla Market, more particularly HC Mahesh, examined as
PW-10.
17. A kind of corroborative evidence is there in the shape of PW-1 Pawan
Kumar, who has appeared and stated that the Appellant had taken a room in
property no. 47 in village Kapashera and was living with his wife i.e. the
prosecutrix. He has clearly identified the Appellant as the said tenant Tahir.
This adds to the chain of events, where the Appellant took the prosecutrix
from the place of her employer to his rented accommodation where they
lived together posing as husband and wife, though they were not married. It
is this place where, according to the prosecutrix PW-2, she was subjected to
sexual intercourse by the Appellant, initially forcibly.
18. The victim was examined at Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan Hospital
by Dr. Than Singh, under the supervision of Dr. Ravinder Kumar, who has
been examined as PW-3. The MLC prepared by Dr. Than Singh is
Ex.PW3/A. The MLC further substantiates, wherein the alleged history, the
prosecutrix has stated that she was in regular sexual relationship with a man
for the last about 08 months on false promise of marriage. She has not given
any history of domestic violence or any other kind of violence. No injuries
were found on the person of prosecutrix. The MLC Ex.PW3/A further
reflects medical abortion of a foetus of two months of gestation, however,
this has not been brought up by anyone, nor it has been touched by the
learned Trial Court. Nevertheless, the circumstances reflect that it was the
result of the sexual relationship between the Appellant and the prosecutrix.
Thus, corroboration to the testimony of the prosecutrix is there, which
fortifies the case against the Appellant. And, in any case, there appears no
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 7 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
reason to disbelieve the victim.
19. The defence put forth on behalf of the Appellant is that the relation
was consensual, as has been otherwise stated in the statement of the Accused
recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and for that matter, even the prosecutrix
has also stated about it that they had developed consensual relationship, but
it was under the promise of marriage, which did not take place. Additionally
it has been stated that the Appellant had, initially for 2 or 3 days, forcefully
raped her. Thereafter, the Appellant seems to have convinced the
prosecutrix, who too fell into the trap and submitted herself to sexual
exploitation of the Appellant.
20. The stand of the prosecutrix is consistent as far as promise of
marriage is concerned. Even otherwise from the circumstances, it appears
that there could not have been any other reason except that the Appellant
was able to convince the prosecutrix through his sweet talks to voluntary
surrender to the lustful desires of the Appellant, whereas he actually did not
want to marry her. Had it not been the case, the Appellant would have
otherwise got rid of the prosecutrix instead of trying to ruin her life by
selling her for the purpose of prostitution.
21. Presence and arrest of the Appellant from the G.B Road area of Police
Station Kamla Market, under these circumstances is an evidence unto itself
about the proposed deal, notwithstanding the fact that the so-called Ashok
Aggarwal with whom the Appellant was talking and purportedly to sell the
victim, has not been joined as a witness.
22. The circumstances are adversely stacked against the Appellant and in
the absence of any plausible explanation, there is no reason to disbelieve the
prosecution’s case. Right from the inception, the intentions of the Appellant
were not aboveboard. It is highly unlikely that within a span of two weeks,
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 8 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
on the basis of only telephonic conversations only, the Appellant was able to
make up his mind to marry the prosecutrix and for that matter, the
prosecutrix also agreed. It was the foundation on the basis of which the
Appellant has been able to entice away the prosecutrix, who despite being
major, was naive enough to believe a total stranger in an unknown city and
agreed to accompany him. The way prosecutrix left her employer’s house
and employment, with bag and baggage, clearly reflects as to what was
going on in her mind. It could not have been one sided as the Appellant had
sowed the seeds, which germinated into this behaviour. It could be nothing
but the promise of marriage and good life to a young girl.
23. The prosecutrix wanted to start a life with the Appellant and marriage
with the Appellant was her desire, ignited by the Appellant and that is the
reason why the initial attempts of the Appellant for having sexual relations
with the prosecutrix were resisted by her, but somehow, as appears from the
testimony of the prosecutrix, the Appellant was able to force himself upon
her or she succumbed to the pressure. Subsequently, the prosecutrix either
acquiesced to the acts of the Appellant and submitted herself or the
Appellant was able to convince her in such a manner about their proposed
marriage and had his way. However, no explanation is forthcoming as to
why, despite staying together for about eight months or so, the Appellant
and the prosecutrix did not marry.
24. In the absence of any plausible reason or explanation from the side of
the Appellant and the subsequent conduct, fortifies the evil intentions of the
Appellant. There was no occasion with him to get the photographs of the
prosecutrix that too not together but individually. If two people are in some
kind of amorous relationship, then photographs are not uncommon, what is
uncommon is that they are not together in the photographs. The telephonic
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 9 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
conversation of the Appellant with some unknown person where reference of
Rs. 50,000/- came and was heard by the prosecutrix, but it has been warded
off by the Appellant. He told the prosecutrix that he was talking about the
expenses involved in the court marriage and for that matter, same
explanation was assigned to the individual photograph of the prosecutrix. A
barely literate lovelorn female of about 19 years of age from a remote tribal
area of Jharkhand living alone in the city, was gullible enough to believe the
Appellant.
25. However, her destiny had something else in store and that is why, she
could be saved from falling into the clutches of the persons involved in flesh
trade. It has come on record that the Appellant and the prosecutrix were
residing in Kapashera. In such circumstances, what was the reason and
occasion with the Appellant to take the prosecutrix to the G.B. Road, which
was probably, and is still notorious for prostitution. There was no occasion
with the Appellant to leave the prosecutrix in the TSR and contact the so
called Ashok Aggarwal and what for, he has not explained. It seems that
either the Appellant was already under a watch by the police or Ashok
Aggarwal seems to be a police informer, a front or a stooge and that seems
to be the reason why, in order to protect the identity of the so called Ashok
Aggarwal, he has not been made a witness. Although, it is only a kind of
conjecture or surmise qua him. However, the possibility cannot be ruled out
for the simple reason that the notoriety of the area and the kind of infamy,
earned on account of prostitution, must have compelled the police officers to
devise and employ all kinds of measures in order to prevent, in the first
place, and to protect and rescue the gullible victims forced into the sex trade.
26. In any case, the Appellant has no explanation about his presence there
with the prosecutrix, leave alone any reasonable and cogent reason, the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 10 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
prosecutrix getting photographed alone and the telephonic talk of Rs.
50,000/- gives further credence to the deposition of the prosecutrix, that she
was about to be thrown into the nadir world of prostitution, apart from being
raped..
27. In view of these facts and circumstances, the element of consent
which indeed was there at some point of time between the Appellant and the
prosecutrix, gets tarnished and bound to get effaced. In any case, the initial
2-3 days, after the prosecutrix moved with the Appellant, were the days
when the Appellant had forced himself upon the prosecutrix. He committed
rape upon the prosecutrix by having intercourse against her will and without
her consent. The acquiescence, if any, qua those 2-3 days, was on the pretext
of marriage, which the Appellant kept delaying and deferring on one or the
other guise. The consent, in any case, was not a free and voluntary consent
rather it was under a kind of deception. Appellant had more than sufficient
time to translate his oral promise in to a reality, but he kept on deferring for
no apparent reason. The prosecutrix, after being left at the Railway Station
by the Appellant, again came back to him. What prevented him to perform
the marriage/Nikah, which incidentally, does not require any elaborate
arrangements except witnesses and Quazi/Religion person competent to
perform Nikah. As such, the plea of consensual sex gets vitiated and no
longer remains a free and fair consent as there was no consensus ad idem. In
this context, reference can be made to the judgment in case titled as State of
Uttar Pradesh Vs. Naushad , AIR 2014 SC 384 where it is observed in the
following words.
“ If consent is given by the prosecutrix under a misconception of
fact, it is vitiated. Accused committed sexual intercourse with the
prosecutrix by giving false assurance that he would marry her,
after she got pregnant, he refused to do so. From this it is evident
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 11 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
that he never intended to marry her and procured her consent only
for the reason of having sexual relationship with her, which act of
the accused falls squarely under the definition of rape as he had
sexual intercourse with her consent which was consent obtain
under a misconception of fact as defined under Section 90 in the
Indian Penal Code.”
The observations made in Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana, (2013) 7
SCC 675 18, can be looked into:
18. Section 114-A of the Evidence Act, 1872 (hereinafter referred
to as “the 1872 Act”) provides, that if the prosecutrix deposes that
she did not give her consent, then the court shall presume that she
did not in fact, give such consent. The facts of the instant case do
not warrant that the provisions of Section 114-A of the 1872 Act be
pressed into service. Hence, the sole question involved herein is
whether her consent had been obtained on the false promise of
marriage. Thus, the provisions of Sections 417, 375 and 376 IPC
have to be taken into consideration, along with the provisions of
Section 90 IPC. Section 90 IPC provides that any consent given
under a misconception of fact, would not be considered as valid
consent, so far as the provisions of Section 375 IPC are concerned,
and thus, such a physical relationship would tantamount to
committing rape.
19. This Court considered the issue involved herein at length in
Uday v. State of Karnataka [Uday v. State of Karnataka, (2003) 4
SCC 46: 2003 SCC (Cri) 775: AIR 2003 SC 1639], Deelip Singh v.
State of Bihar [Deelip Singh v. State of Bihar, (2005) 1 SCC 88:
2005 SCC (Cri) 253 AIR 2005 SC 203], Yedla Srinivasa Rao v.
State of A.P. [(2006) 11 SCC 615: (2007) 1 SCC (Cri) 557] and
Pradeep Kumar v. State of Bihar Pradeep Kumar v. State of Bihar,
(2007) 7 SCC 413: (2007) 3 SCC (Cri) 407: AIR 2007 SC 3059]
and came to the conclusion that in the event that the accused‟s
promise is not false and has not been made with the sole intention
to seduce the prosecutrix to indulge in sexual acts, such an act(s)
would not amount to rape. Thus, the same would only hold that
where the prosecutrix, under a misconception of fact to the extent
that the accused is likely to marry her, submits to the lust of the
accused, such a fraudulent act cannot be said to be consensual, so
far as the offence of the accused is concerned.
20. Rape is the most morally and physically reprehensible crime in
a society, as it is an assault on the body, mind and privacy of the
victim. While a murderer destroys the physical frame of the victim,
a rapist degrades and defiles the soul of a helpless female. Rape
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 12 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
reduces a woman to an animal, as it shakes the very core of her
life. By no means can a rape victim be called an accomplice. Rape
leaves a permanent scar on the life of the victim, and therefore a
rape victim is placed on a higher pedestal than an injured witness.
Rape is a crime against the entire society and violates the human
rights of the victim. Being the most hated crime, rape tantamounts
to a serious blow to the supreme honour of a woman, and offends
both, her esteem and dignity. It causes psychological and physical
harm to the victim, leaving upon her indelible marks.
21. Consent may be express or implied, coerced or misguided,
obtained willingly or through deceit. Consent is an act of reason,
accompanied by deliberation, the mind weighing, as in a balance,
the good and evil on each side. There is a clear distinction between
rape and consensual sex and in a case like this, the Court must very
carefully examine whether the accused had actually wanted to
marry the victim, or had mala fide motives, and had made a false
promise to this effect only to satisfy his lust, as the latter falls
within the ambit of cheating or deception. There is a distinction
between the mere breach of a promise, and not fulfilling a false
promise. Thus, the Court must examine whether there was made, at
an early stage a false promise of marriage by the accused; and
whether the consent involved was given after wholly understanding
the nature and consequences of sexual indulgence. There may be a
case where the prosecutrix agrees to have sexual intercourse on
account of her love and passion for the accused, and not solely on
account of misrepresentation made to her by the accused, or where
an accused on account of circumstances which he could not have
foreseen, or which were beyond his control, was unable to marry
her, despite having every intention to do so. Such cases must be
treated differently. An accused can be convicted for rape only if the
Court reaches a conclusion that the intention of the accused was
mala fide, and that he had clandestine motives.
22. In Deelip Singh [Deelip Singh v. State of Bihar, (2005) 1 SCC
88: 2005 SCC (Cri) 253: AIR 2005 SC 203] it has been observed
as under: (SCC p. 99, para 19)
“19. The factors set out in the first part of Section 90 are
from the point of view of the victim. The second part of
Section 90 enacts the corresponding provision from the point
of view of the accused. It envisages that the accused too has
knowledge or has reason to believe that the consent was
given by the victim in consequence of fear of injury or
misconception of fact. Thus, the second part lays emphasis on
the knowledge or reasonable belief of the person who obtains
the tainted consent. The requirements of both the parts
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 13 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
should be cumulatively satisfied. In other words, the Court
has to see whether the person giving the consent had given it
under fear of injury or misconception of fact and the Court
should also be satisfied that the person doing the act i.e. the
alleged offender, is conscious of the fact or should have
reason to think that but for the fear or misconception, the
consent would not have been given. This is the scheme of
Section 90 which is couched in negative terminology.”
23. This Court, while deciding Pradeep Kumar [Pradeep Kumar v.
State of Bihar, (2007) 7 SCC 413: (2007) 3 SCC (Cri) 407: AIR
2007 SC 3059], placed reliance upon the judgment of the Madras
High Court in N. Jaladu, In re [ILR (1913) 36 Mad 453], wherein
it has been observed: (Pradeep Kumar case [Pradeep Kumarv.
State of Bihar, (2007) 7 SCC 413: (2007) 3 SCC (Cri) 407: AIR
2007 SC 3059], SCC pp. 418-19, para 11)
“11. 26.... “... We are of opinion that the expression „under a
misconception of fact‟ is broad enough to include all cases
where the consent is obtained by misrepresentation; the
misrepresentation should be regarded as leading to a
misconception of the facts with reference to which the
consent is given. In Section 3 of the Evidence Act Illustration
(d) [states] that a person has a certain intention is treated as
a fact. So, here the fact about which the second and third
prosecution witnesses were made to entertain a
misconception was the fact that the second accused intended
to get the girl married. „thus... if the consent of the person
from whose possession the girl is taken is obtained by fraud,
the taking is deemed to be against the will of such a
person‟.... Although in cases of contracts a consent obtained
by coercion or fraud is only voidable by the party affected by
it, the effect of Section 90 IPC is that such consent cannot,
under the criminal law, be availed of to justify what would
otherwise be an offence.” (N. Jaladu, In re case [ILR (1913)
36 Mad 453], ILR pp. 456-57)‟ (Deelip Singh case [Deelip
Singh v. State of Bihar, (2005) 1 SCC 88: 2005 SCC (Cri)
253: AIR 2005 SC 203], SCC pp. 101-02, para 26)”
24. Hence, it is evident that there must be adequate evidence to
show that at the relevant time i.e. at the initial stage itself, the
accused had no intention whatsoever, of keeping his promise to
marry the victim. There may, of course, be circumstances, when a
person having the best of intentions is unable to marry the victim
owing to various unavoidable circumstances. The “failure to keep
a promise made with respect to a future uncertain date, due to
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 14 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
reasons that are not very clear from the evidence available, does
not always amount to misconception of fact. In order to come
within the meaning of the term “misconception of fact”, the fact
must have an immediate relevance”. Section 90 IPC cannot be
called into aid in such a situation, to pardon the act of a girl in
entirety, and fasten criminal liability on the other, unless the court
is assured of the fact that from the very beginning, the accused had
never really intended to marry her.
Reference in this context can also be made to Sonu V. State of U.P.
(20210 18 SCC 517 and Pramod Suryabhan Pawar V. State of
Maharasthra, (2019) 9 SCC 608. It can thus be informed that the consent
becomes immaterial once it is found to be vitiated by fraud, deception,
misrepresentation or similar other factor. The case in hand seems to be one
where consent of the prosecutrix was not free and voluntary at least on
initial 2-3 days when she was raped. Subsequent to that was on the false
promise of marriage, which again is no consent.
28. In such circumstances, the conclusion reached by the learned Trial
Court, cannot be faulted, rather the Appellant should have been charged and
tried for an offence involving human trafficking also. However, no such plea
has been put forth, nor the chargesheet contains any such allegation and no
appeal has been preferred by the State either. As a result, the appeal against
conviction deserves to be and stands declined.
29. A feeble and meek submission has been put forth on behalf of the
Appellant, where it is projected that he is the sole bread earner of the family
including his younger brother and old father and it was sought that the
period of custody undergone by him during the trial or otherwise, may be
considered as sufficient punishment. The Appellant has been sentenced to
undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 07 years vide impugned
Order on Sentence dated 31.03.2012, but then, given the facts of the case in
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 15 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10
its entirety, there appears no reason at all to give any indulgence to this plea
as the Appellant not only took advantage of the naivety and gullibility of a
poor tribal girl and raped her against her wishes and under a false promise of
marriage, but even attempted to sell her, where the victim was most likely to
be forced into prostitution. As a result, the sentence is also upheld and
maintained.
30. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeal in its entirety stands
dismissed. The Appellant is called upon to surrender forthwith to undergo
the remaining sentence. He shall be entitled to the benefit of set off under
Section 428 Cr.P.C.
31. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
32. Copy of the judgment be transmitted to the learned Trial Court and the
Prison Authorities for information and necessary compliance.
VIMAL KUMAR YADAV, J
MAY 29, 2026/ akc/ps
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1201/2012 Tahir Ansari vs. State Page 16 of 16
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:30.05.2026
15:24:10