Presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecution for rape
Section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecution for rape. In a prosecution for rape under clause (a), clause (b), clause (c), clause (d), clause (e), clause (f), clause (g), clause (h), clause (i), clause (j), clause (k), clause (l), clause (m) or clause (n) of sub-section (2) of section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), where sexual intercourse b The Act came into force on 01 Sep 1872. Repealed by section 170 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (47 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
In a prosecution for rape under clause (a), clause (b), clause (c), clause (d), clause (e), clause (f), clause (g), clause (h), clause (i), clause (j), clause (k), clause (l), clause (m) or clause (n) of sub-section (2) of section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), where sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and the question is whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have been raped and such woman states in her evidence before the court that she did not consent, the court shall presume that she did not consent.
Explanation.–– In this section, “sexual intercourse” shall mean any of the acts mentioned in clauses (a) to (d) of section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).] CHAPTER VIII. –– ESTOPPEL
Section 114A, The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act 1 of 1872).
Now in the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam
BSA 120 Presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecution for rape Text carried over almost unchanged 95%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Referred to by 1
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Deepak Gulati vs State of Haryana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
For a conviction under Section 376 IPC based on false promise of marriage, the court must find clear and convincing evidence that the accused harboured mala fide intentions and made a false promise of marriage with the sole objective of seducing the victim into sexual acts from the very inception of the relationship. Mere breach of a promise to marry, or failure to fulfil a promise due to unforeseen circumstances or changed intentions during the course of the relationship, does not constitute rape unless the deception was deliberate and predatory from the beginning. The victim's age, maturity, voluntary participation, lack of resistance, and continued hope of marriage are relevant factors in determining whether consent was genuinely given or obtained through deception.
On this section: Presumption regarding consent in rape cases; the court noted that this section presumes absence of consent only when the prosecutrix testifies she did not give consent, but the facts of the case did not warrant reliance on this presumption
-
Munna vs State of M. P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While the testimony of a prosecutrix in a sexual assault case deserves significant weight and can be the basis for conviction even without corroboration, such conviction cannot be sustained when the prosecutrix's statement has inherent infirmities and the totality of circumstances creates doubt about the veracity of the prosecution version. The presence of major discrepancies between initial allegations and trial version, the victim's own subsequent retraction, complete absence of medical or physical corroborative evidence, internal contradictions in the victim's testimony, and evidence of motive for false accusation collectively create a situation where the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused.
On this section: Statutory presumption regarding absence of consent in certain circumstances; court noted this presumption does not overcome infirmities in prosecution testimony when credibility is impaired
-
Anoop V.M. v. State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
HC Final Order order-2.pdf 2025-04-10 DATE VERIFIED. Kerala DB P.B. Suresh Kumar/Jobin Sebastian. Crl.A 1491/2019. IEA 114A presumption applies only in a s.376(2) rape prosecution where intercourse is proved and the woman states she did not consent; it cannot be drawn for attempt, and cannot be drawn without that foundational statement. Map iea 114A + BSA 120 successor (near-identical 0.8647). Do not pad ipc 90 (already filled by Anurag Soni).
On this section: IEA 114A applies only where sexual intercourse is proved and the woman states she did not consent; it does not apply to attempt (Anoop V.M.).
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt by leading cogent evidence, however, considering the ethos and culture of the Indian Society, and considering the rising graph of the commission of the social crime - 'Rape', the courts have been permitted to raise a legal presumption as contained in Section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act. As per Section 114A, a presumption could be raised as to the absence of consent in certain cases pertaining to Rape. As per the said provision, if sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and the question arises as to whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have been …
-
… if sexual act is proved and the question is whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have been raped and she states in her evidence before the Court that she did not consent, the Court shall presume that she did not consent. Accordingly, presumption is drawn under Section 114A of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 holding that there was no consent on the part of the victim. 36. In the present case, the prosecution has proved the fact that the accused took the victim to Maharaja Inn Hotel, Mysore where in a room, the accused entered, gave assurance to the victim and on such assurance, he had …
-
… has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt by leading cogent evidence, however, considering the ethos and culture of the Indian Society, and considering the rising graph of the commission of the social crime - 'Rape', the courts have been permitted to raise a legal presumption as contained in Section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act. As per Section 114A, a presumption could be raised as to the absence of consent in certain cases pertaining to Rape. As per the said provision, if sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and the question arises as to whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have been …
Questions about Section 114A
What have the courts held on Section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act?
Deepak Gulati vs State of Haryana (20 May 2013) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Presumption regarding consent in rape cases; the court noted that this section presumes absence of consent only when the prosecutrix testifies she did not give consent, but the facts of the case did not warrant reliance on this presumption. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2013 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: IEA 114A, section 114A IEA, section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Deepak Gulati vs State of Haryana (20 May 2013).
What should I read with Section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on Indian Penal Code 375 (Rape), Indian Penal Code 376 (Punishment for rape), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BSA 120 (Presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecution for rape), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act come into force?
Section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act, cited as IEA 114A, came into force on 01 Sep 1872, having been enacted on 15 Mar 1872. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant1207 words
- 14. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body of bodily feeling1080 words
- 92. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement809 words
- 8. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct773 words
- 65B. Admissibility of electronic records743 words
- 3. Interpretation-clause667 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item e51341fa-7528-4327-9a57-5d194e16db6f). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.