The Chhattisgarh High Court has said that merely proving that a woman was pregnant and later suffered a miscarriage was not enough to convict a man, but it must also prove that the miscarriage was caused by the accused’s act and occurred without the woman’s consent. The court was dealing with a man’s conviction for causing miscarriage and rape after he allegedly impregnated a married woman on the promise of marriage.Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal acquitted the man after finding that the prosecution failed to establish that the accused’s act caused the miscarriage and that it was done without the woman’s consent.The court also noted that the woman admitted to being married but claimed to have no physical relations with her husband while hearing the appeal filed by the man challenging the May 2016 conviction order, under which he was awarded three years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5,000.“Mere proof of pregnancy followed by miscarriage, in the absence of cogent evidence connecting the act of the accused with the miscarriage and establishing want of consent, would not be sufficient to sustain conviction,” the September 26 order read. The court also said the prosecution had to establish “beyond reasonable doubt” that the woman was pregnant, suffered a miscarriage, and that the miscarriage was caused by an act of the accused without her consent.Miscarriage, case and convictionAccording to the prosecution, the woman, who was married and lived in the same neighbourhood as the man, lodged an FIR in May 2013. She alleged that he had sexually exploited her for about a year on the promise of marriage and that she became pregnant.She claimed that when she asked him to marry her, he refused, saying she belonged to a lower caste, and later allegedly gave her pills that caused her to miscarry. She said she was about three months pregnant at the time.Story continues below this adDuring her medical examination, the doctor found that she was 10-12 weeks pregnant and was in the process of having an abortion. The doctor also stated that the miscarriage could have occurred naturally or because of an external cause. Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal said that medical evidence proving a miscarriage, by itself, was not enough to establish the charges.The man was arrested in July 2013. The trial court convicted him in May 2016, following which he approached the High Court.He argued that the woman was married and living with her husband and that the pregnancy was from her husband. He claimed he had no connection with her family or the pregnancy.Also Read | Why a man brought a lifeless foetus to a judge’s dais in Rs 200 crore claim against Maruti SuzukiArgumentsThe man was represented by advocate Seema Verma, who argued that there was no evidence that the pregnancy was conceived with her client and no DNA report of the fetus. Verma also argued that there was no evidence that the man had forcibly administered the pills against the woman’s consent.Story continues below this adThe state, through panel lawyer Malay Jain, argued that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. He said the woman had specifically stated that the man had a physical relationship with her on the promise of marriage and that he later administered pills after she became pregnant, resulting in a miscarriage.‘Love affair with accused’The court noted that during cross-examination, the woman admitted that she was married and was not having physical relations with her husband. “She admitted that she was having a love affair with the man and both of them consensually had physical relations, which continued for one year,” it added.The court also noted that she had not told her parents about the pregnancy before lodging the complaint. It further found that she had not handed over the medical prescription or medicines to the police.The court said that medical evidence proving a miscarriage, by itself, was not enough to establish the charges. The prosecution also had to prove that the accused caused the miscarriage and that it was done without the woman’s consent, both beyond reasonable doubt.Story continues below this ad“This distinction can become decisive where the woman herself took abortion pills, went to hospital voluntarily or medical records indicate consent,” it added. Giving the man the benefit of the doubt, the court acquitted him of all charges and set aside the trial court’s conviction order.