Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that a woman in a 16-year live-in relationship cannot claim rape based on a false promise of marriage, emphasizing that prolonged cohabitation indicates consent, not coercion.
The case arose from a complaint filed by a woman, a lecture, who accused her former live-in partner, a bank official, of rape. She alleged that he had engaged in a physical relationship with her for 16 years based on an unfulfilled promise of marriage. The complainant contended that her consent was obtained under a misconception of fact, making it legally invalid under rape laws.
The petitioner, the accused bank official, sought to quash the criminal proceedings, arguing that the relationship was entirely consensual. It was submitted that both individuals were well-educated professionals who voluntarily continued the relationship despite being posted in different towns. The petitioner emphasised that there was no coercion or deceit, and the complaint was a result of a failed relationship rather than a case of sexual exploitation.
The Supreme Court, while analyzing the circumstances, observed that the long duration of the relationship indicated mutual consent rather than coercion. The Court noted, “It is hard to believe that the complainant continued engaging in the relationship for 16 years without raising any protest if she truly believed she was being exploited under a false promise of marriage.” The bench further stated that “even assuming that a false promise was made, the prolonged nature of the relationship renders the claim that consent was vitiated implausible.” The Court emphasised that in cases where parties have cohabited for an extended period, allegations of rape based on a subsequent refusal to marry must be scrutinized carefully.
Consequently, the Top Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the accused, concluding that the complaint lacked merit. It underscored that a live-in relationship that persists for over a decade cannot later be reframed as coercion, and such allegations should not be used to criminalize consensual relationships that have turned sour.
Picture Source :
