Supreme Court says failed relationships cannot turn consensual intimacy into rape

The Supreme Court has expressed concern over the rising number of criminal cases filed after relationships fail, saying physical intimacy during a consensual relationship cannot later be described as rape merely because the relationship ended, news agency Press Trust of India reported.

In a significant judgement on Friday, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan discharged a Kerala-based man of charges of rape, cheating and marrying again while his first marriage was still valid. It said society and courts must discourage the use of criminal law as a weapon after emotional discord between two consenting adults.

“In such cases, physical intimacy that occurred during the currency of a functioning relationship cannot be retrospectively branded as acts of rape merely because the relationship soured and no longer subsists,” the bench said.

The court said it had noticed a worrying trend in recent years in which consensual relationships that had ended were later examined closely to identify conduct that could be portrayed as violence or sexual assault.

“There is thus a need to distinguish between an absence of consent in its entirety because of it having been built entirely on a mirage of deceit and falsehood at the outset on the one hand, from the experiencing of regret over having consented to past sexual acts, owing to the later demise of the relationship,” it said.

The bench said the latter situation was unfortunate, but regret alone could not turn a consensual relationship into a crime or set the criminal justice system in motion in a way that deprived the accused of his liberty and reputation.

“In fact, such an approach denudes the man of any agency entirely, as the mere factum of being in a consensual relationship at one point would bind him to it entirely for fear of being accused of rape at a subsequent point of time,” the court said.

It asked: “In such a scenario, can it be said that the man had no right to withdraw from the relationship? Can such a decision be termed as deceit or fraud? Clearly not.”

The bench said the court had repeatedly witnessed a “disturbing trend where failed relationships are being converted into criminal cases”.

“Rape, being a heinous offence, must be reserved for situations where there is real sexual violence, coercion, or manipulation of consent. When every consensual relationship which sours is converted into an accusation of rape, it not only dilutes the gravity of the offence alleged or rather negates the very allegation of crime,” it said.

The court said a false accusation of rape also subjected the accused to irreparable stigma, harassment and injustice. “This is not merely a matter of personal dispute. The abuse of the criminal justice process in such cases is a matter of serious concern and must be condemned. Hence, courts would have to view the entire relationship holistically rather than from the perspective of its end,” it said.

The bench also cautioned that rape strikes at the core of a woman’s bodily autonomy and dignity. It said the offence continued to be heavily underreported, with victims often encouraged to remain silent to protect their own and their family’s honour and reputation instead of seeking justice.

“For every case where the provisions related to rape are misused, there are several cases that never see the light of day,” the court said. It emphasised that genuine cases must be pursued vigorously when the facts clearly establish sexual assault and violence.

“But equally, the justice system must not be turned into a tool of vengeance when relationships fail,” the bench said. It added that the legislature never intended consensual sexual acts between adults in a mutually affectionate relationship to be criminalised retrospectively merely because the relationship had ended.

“It is unfortunate that despite judicial deprecation, this trend is increasing, and it is a matter of concern for the courts as often settlement of disputes comes with huge monetary considerations to be borne by the male accused,” the bench said.

According to PTI, the Supreme Court found that the ingredients needed to establish rape, cheating and deceit were not made out against the man. He had approached the court against a Kerala High Court order dismissing his petition seeking discharge and the quashing of proceedings against him.

According to the prosecution, the woman alleged that the man had married her after concealing his previous marriage. She claimed that she had consented to sexual intercourse because of what she described as an “illegal marriage” secured through fraud.

She also alleged that the accused had lived with her deceitfully by making her believe that their marriage was lawful, even though his earlier marriage was still valid. The woman, who had been divorced from an earlier marriage, accused him of rape, cheating and breach of trust. She alleged that they married in Mysuru and lived together from 1996 to 2003.

Discharging the man, the Supreme Court reiterated that genuine allegations of sexual violence must be pursued firmly, but criminal law should not be used for vengeance or to retrospectively criminalise consensual intimacy after a relationship ends.- Ends