Rape on Pretext of Marriage has become one of the most abused laws by disgruntled girlfriends. A consensual relationship may not always culminate into marriage, and adult women who indulge in physical relations with consent, should not term it as rape, if the same fails.
The Kerala High Court on Thursday has once again emphasised that rape charges will not be attracted against a man merely because the relationship between him and a woman turned sour over time. The observations by the High Court though were oral, while reserving its verdict in the bail application moved by a Central Government Counsel in a sexual assault case.
A Central Government Counsel of the State (GCS), Advocate Navneeth N Nath was arrested last month after a sexual abuse complaint was lodged against him by a colleague. The decision in this case will be pronounced today (July 8, 2022).
Allegation By Complainant Woman
The allegation by the alleged victim was that she had been in a relationship with the CGC for 4 years, but he later decided to marry another woman. When she came to about this after meeting his fiance at a hotel, she allegedly tried to die by suicide.
After the arrest, the CGC moved the High Court with a bail application.
Advocate John S Ralph appeared for the de-facto complainant and submitted that their sexual relationship was based on an absolute promise to marry which has now proved to be false.
The Public Prosecutor also opposed the application citing that whatever consent was obtained was based on a misconception of facts and that the offence of rape will be attracted in this case.
Arguments by Petitioner (Accused)
Senior Advocate Ramesh Chander appearing for the petitioner argued that his client intended to marry the de facto complainant and that the sexual relationship between them was completely consensual. He said he met the woman (who is now his fiance) only after their parents objected to the marriage between him and the de facto complainant.
It was added the couple was conscious from the outset that their relationship may not be accepted since they belonged to different faiths but the complainant chose to take her chances and continued the relationship.
Kerala High Court
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed that in all such cases crucial aspect to be considered is whether consent for sexual intercourse was obtained on the promise of marriage.
Thomas orally remarked that the relationships have evolved over time and that young adults these days have a different outlook on romantic relationships, but that the fact that the relationship did not work out will not attract the offence of rape. He said,
A relationship turning sour at a later point of time will not amount to rape. In the present social context, we have live-in relationships and open marriages.
Practically speaking, the age of marriage has also changed now. Girls aged 28 and 29 years are not ready to get married these days. They are enjoying their independence.
New generation children don’t always want to marry, they don’t want to have children. But the difficulty that arises is that allegations of rape surface after these relationships turn sour.”
The Kerala High Court added that this change in relationships has led to an increasing number of rape allegations being raised after these couples break up and marry others. However, this does not always imply that one of the partners was forced into having sexual relationship on a false promise to marry.
Justice Thomas went on to add,
Now we find young men and women living together, enjoying relationships and like in foreign countries. It is only after they understand their physical and mental compatibility that they decide to get married. At a later stage, if they realise that they are incompatible, they both may end the relationship.
There might be situations where one of them prefers to continue in the relationship but the other does not. But all of these are not situations which will amount to a case of rape. It may be a breach of promise, but breach of promise is not rape.
Whether prolonged relationship can constitute as Rape?
The High Court further analysed that the couple had been in a relationship for over 4-years, and that the complainant’s case may be affected by the Supreme Court decision in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v State Of Maharashtra where it was held that a long period of a relationship is indicative of an absence obtaining consent by promising to marry.
The Court also noted that in the FIS, there was no indication that the woman indulged in sex only with the belief that he was going to marry her. Order to be pronounced today.
CASE: Navaneeth N Nath v State of Kerala
"Relationship Turning Sour Cannot Attract Rape Charges" | Kerala HC Reserves Bail Order For Accused Central Government Counsel
"Men & Women enjoy relationships like in foreign countries; Marry only after matching their physical & mental compatibility"https://t.co/gBMLelLXlq
— Voice For Men India (@voiceformenind) July 8, 2022
Vijay Babu Pre-Arrest Bail Granted By Kerala HC | Discussion With Activist Mithun Vijay Kumar
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below
Blogging about Equal Rights for Men or writing about Gender Biased Laws is often looked upon as controversial, as many 'perceive' it Anti-Women. Due to this grey area - where we demand Equality in the true sense for all genders - most brands distance themselves from advertising on a portal like ours.
We, therefore, look forward to your support as donors who understand our work and are willing to partner in this endeavour to spread this cause. Do support our work to counter one sided gender biased narratives in the media.
To make an instant donation, click on the "Donate Now" button above. For information regarding donation via Bank Transfer, click here.
Alternately, you can also donate to us via our UPI ID: voiceformenindia@hdfcbank