On Monday, the Supreme Court drew attention to the troubling trend of invoking criminal law in cases arising from failed consensual relationships between adults, highlighting its broader social and legal consequences. The matter involved a lawyer who faced a rape complaint from his client, who alleged that a physical relationship developed on the assurance of marriage. Interestingly, the lawyer was representing the woman in divorce proceedings when the relationship began. The case raised questions about consent, trust, and the fine line between personal discord and criminality.
The complainant stated that her consent to intimacy was based on a promise of marriage, which was later not fulfilled. The defense argued that the relationship lasted for three years, during which the parties remained emotionally involved, indicating ongoing mutual consent. The legal debate centred on whether the relationship could retrospectively be treated as criminal when it failed to culminate in marriage.
The bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan observed that repeatedly converting failed adult relationships into criminal cases is a matter of profound concern. They noted that the offence of rape, being of the gravest kind, must only apply where genuine sexual violence, coercion, or absence of free consent exists. The Court clarified that physical intimacy within a functioning relationship cannot be retrospectively branded as rape merely because the relationship ended. At the same time, the Court recognised that consent given on the assurance of marriage could be vitiated if there is clear evidence of exploitation or bad faith. The Apex Court ultimately quashed the criminal proceedings against the lawyer, underscoring the need to distinguish between genuine cases of abuse and personal disputes.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
