Team  SoOLEGAL

Relationship turning sour does not mean sexual intercourse was non-consensual: Bombay High Court

Team SoOLEGAL 7 Apr 2023 11:00am

Relationship turning sour does not mean sexual intercourse was non-consensual: Bombay High Court

New Delhi: When a relationship between two adults deteriorates and does not result in marriage, one person cannot be blamed and charged with rape, the Bombay High Court recently ruled. The offence of rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) cannot be established, according to single-judge Justice Bharati Dangre, because there was no indication that the promise of marriage was made on every occasion when the physical relationship was established.

As a result, the Court dismissed a rape case against the man after noting that the complainant and the accused had been in a relationship for 8 years and that the complaint was filed only after the relationship ended in 2016.

The court observed “Two matured persons coming together and investing in a relationship, one cannot be blamed only because the other complained of the act at some point of time when the relationship did not go well and for whatever reason need not ultimately culminate into a marriage.” 

The judge also stated that the complainant was mature enough to understand the nature of the relationship, and that simply because the relationship ended does not imply that the sexual intercourse occurred without her consent.

The bench further held that “The prosecutrix is sufficiently of matured age to be conscious of the relationship, both physical and mental, and merely because, the relationship had now turned sour, it cannot be inferred that the physical relationship established with her, on every occasion, was against her will and without her consent.”

According to the woman's complaint, after they began dating in 2013, the applicant occasionally performed forcible intercourse on her at various locations in Mumbai. She agreed to it on the condition that the marriage will be solemnized; however, whenever she inquired about it, he refused.

Later, they began living apart, and their relationship ended. Following that, the applicant allegedly forwarded some obscene messages to her and made disparaging remarks about her character.

She then filed a complaint, which resulted in a FIR under Sections 376 (rape) and 323 (voluntarily causing harm) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. A charge sheet was filed, and the accused moved for discharge from the case at the stage of framing of charges. He claimed that he had been in an 8-year relationship with the woman, and that the physical relationship had been established with her consent.

 

In 2019, a session’s court in Mumbai denied the discharge application, prompting the current revision application before the High Court. According to Justice Dangre, refusing to discharge the applicant cannot be justified solely on the grounds that the intercourse was forcible.

After considering the facts and circumstances, the judge quashed and set aside the order of the session’s court and discharged the applicant. 



Tagged: sexual intercourse  
Did you find this write up useful? YES 0 NO 0
×

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

0

DAYS

0

HOURS

0

MINUTES

0

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.
×

SAARTHTo Know More

Launching Soon : SAARTH, your complete client, case, practise & document management SAAS application with direct client chat feature.

If you want to know more give us a Call at :+91 98109 29455 or Mail info@soolegal.com