While quashing a rape charge against a 25-year-old man, the High Court of Karnataka has directed him to pay ₹10,000 per month as maintenance to a child born to the victim due to his sexual acts with her as it was proved in the DNA test that he is the biological father of the child, and he had continued physical relationship with her despite her marriage with another man.
Noticing the nature of the prolonged sexual relationship between the accused man and the woman for over four years, the Court said the charge of rape cannot be sustained against him.
However, the Court directed that the accused, Raghavendraraddi will have to face the trial for the charges of cheating criminal intimidation as he, prima facie, only had the intention to have sexual relationship with her on the promise of marrying her and result of cheating is the birth of child.
The Court also noted that there is an ingredient for the offence of criminal intimidation as the accused, despite her marriage with another man, had continued a sexual relationship with her by threatening her that he would disclose their relationship to her husband.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the order on a petition filed by the accused questioning the criminal case registered against him by the victim in February 2023.
Long relationship
The accused and victim were in love with each other since 2018 and it was stated in the complaint that the accused had intercourse with her on several occasions between 2018 and 2022 on the promise of marrying her.
However, she had to marry another man in 2021 on her parents’ wish as the accused, at that time, did not come forward to marry her, the court noted while pointing out from the complaint that she refrained from having a sexual relationship with her husband as the accused threatened her of disclosing her relationship with him to the husband. While her relationship with her husband got strained, she gave birth to a girl child, the court noted.
Finally, she lodged a complaint against the accused after she came to know that he was preparing to marry another girl, the Court said while pointing out that “now she [victim] is left in lurch as she has neither the support of her husband due to strained relationship nor of the accused, who is wanting to marry another girl.”
DNA test
Meanwhile, the Court, from the DNA test report submitted by the police along with the charge sheet against the accused, found that the accused is the biological father and the victim is the biological mother of the child. The DNA test was conducted as the accused claimed that he was not the father of the child but the victim had categorically claimed that accused is child’s father.
Observing that “the innocent child is caught in the crossfire between the accused and the complainant” the Court, in the peculiar facts case, said that the accused “cannot now show a hands off to the responsibility of the child which is born to him till the conclusion of the trial” while directing him to pay maintenance to the child till then.
