In a recent order which will bring relief to many men in failed relationships, the Bombay High Court Aurangabad bench has quashed a rape case against a 33-year-old man, noting that he cannot be prosecuted for changing his mind after a long relationship and refusing to marry a woman he was in a relationship with.
The man moved the high court for quashing the case, contending that the physical relationship was consensual and said his subsequent refusal to marry the woman was no ground for the rape charge.
A division bench of justices Sunil Deshmukh and Nitin Suryavanshi said,
From the narration in the FIR (First Information Report) and the material collected during the course of the investigation, it is clear that the applicant had genuine desire to marry the victim. However, later he changed his mind and decided not to marry her. Merely because he resiled from his promise to marry, no offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC (Indian Penal Code) in the facts of the present case is made out against the applicant.
According to the 30-year-old woman’s complaint in the case, the two had physical relations. As reported by Hindustan Times, the woman said that her boyfriend on multiple occasions promised to marry her. She further said her relatives approached the man with a marriage proposal but were asked to wait due to the COVID pandemic.
However, last year the woman’s family subsequently registered charges of rape against the 33-year-old, for allegedly exploiting the complainant physically and mentally under the false promise of marriage.
The accused man moved the high court for quashing the case, contending that the physical relationship was consensual. He said his subsequent refusal to marry the woman was no ground for the rape charge.
The prosecution maintained the woman’s consent was obtained under the false promise of marriage and since the beginning, the applicant had no intention to marry her.
Bombay High Court
The Bombay high court accepted the stand of the accused. The bench remarked,
The statements of the woman’s relatives showed the man intended to marry her. However, later he changed his mind. Considering these aspects, it cannot be said that the applicant had given a false promise of marriage to the victim and obtained her consent for establishing physical relations. It appears that the consensual physical relations were the outcome of their love affair.
- Time and again we have voiced our concern over registration of such rape cases
- All these numbers are accounted as rapes under NCRB report of Crimes Against Women, which then paints India as the alleged ‘rape capital’ of the world
- What is more important is the label of rapist a common man faces – because he merely happened to change his mind for marriage after a consensual affair
- Is there any punishment or IPC for women who date men for years and then back out from marriage?
- While globally countries progress with their laws, make amendments from time to time, India and all its governments at the centre have only created laws, largely based on knee jerk outrage from public, stemming from individual cases
- There is no review of such anti men laws, and no government wants to get into the red zone of amending or passing any law which may seem gender neutral (read: not completely lopsided in favour of women)
- We are only ruining futures of common men, who have to run pillar to post to get bail – these are people who have never seen a police station or courts and have no clue how they can be labelled as criminals with mere complaint by their ex-girlfriends
ALSO READ –
Orissa High Court | “Sex On Pretext Of Marriage Is Not Rape” | Bail Granted After Nearly 6-Months Custody
READ ORDER | Mumbai Court Grants Bail To Rape Accused As Live-in Relationship Is Sufficient To Show That Sexual Relationship Was Consensual
ALSO WATCH –
Unmarried Women Dont Indulge In Sex Without Promise Of Marriage | We Discuss Madhya Pradesh HC Order
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below