3rd National Essay Writing Competition, 2019 [Prizes Worth Rs. 30,000]: Register by Jan 30, 2019
December 26, 2018
Supreme Court upholds department-wise SC/ST quota in universities, dismisses Centre’s plea against Allahabad HC order
January 23, 2019

Consensual sex between live-in partners does not amount to rape if man fails to marry woman: Supreme Court

consensual physical relationship between live-in partners does not amount to rape in case if the man neglects to wed the woman because of conditions outside his ability to control, the Supreme Court has held. The best court said this while subduing a FIR held up by a Maharashtra-based medical caretaker against a specialist, who were in a live-in relationship "for a long while". "Along these lines, there is an unmistakable refinement among assault and consensual sex. The court, in such cases, should cautiously inspect whether the complainant had really needed to wed the person in question or had mala fide thought processes and had made a false guarantee to this impact just to fulfill his desire, as the later falls inside the ambit of bamboozling or duplicity," a seat of Justices AK Sikri and S Abdul Nazeer said in an ongoing decision. The seat likewise said that if "the charged has not made the guarantee with the sole goal to allure the prosecutrix (lady) to enjoy sexual acts, such a demonstration would not amount to rape". As indicated by the FIR, the lady, a widow, had experienced passionate feelings for the specialist and they began living respectively.
There might be where the prosecutrix consents to have sex because of her adoration and enthusiasm for the blamed and not exclusively on record for the misinterpretation made by charged, or where a denounced, by virtue of conditions which he couldn't have anticipated or which were outside his ability to control, was not able wed her notwithstanding having each aim to do. Such cases must be dealt with in an unexpected way," the seat said. It said on the off chance that the man had any mala fide aim or covert thought processes, it was a reasonable instance of assault. "The recognized consensual physical connection between the gatherings would not comprise an offense under area 376 (assault) of the IPC," the seat said. Alluding to the realities of the case, the court said they were living respectively for a long while and when the lady came to realize that the man had hitched another person, she stopped the protestation. "We are of the view that, regardless of whether the charges made in the dissension are taken at their assumed worth and acknowledged completely, they don't put forth out a defense against the litigant (specialist)," the seat said. The man had moved toward the best court against the decision of the Bombay High Court which had rejected his request looking for subduing of the FIR held up against him.