Relationship turning sour does not mean sex was non-consensual: Bombay High Court

One person alone cannot be blamed and charged for rape when a relationship between two adults turn sour and does not culminate in marriage, the Bombay High Court recent held..Single-judge Justice Bharati Dangre said the offence of rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) cannot be made out when there was no indication that on every occasion when the physical relationship was established, the promise of marriage was made. The Court, therefore, quashed a rape case against a man after noting that the complainant and the accused were in a relationship for 8 long years and the complaint was lodged in 2016 only after the relationship turned sour. “Two matured persons coming together and investing in a relationship, one cannot be blamed only because the other complained of the act at some point of time when the relationship did not go well and for whatever reason need not ultimately culminate into a marriage” the Court said..The judge also said that the complainant had sufficient maturity to understand the nature of the relationship and merely because the relationship broke, it cannot be inferred that the sex was without her consent. “The prosecutrix is sufficiently of matured age to be conscious of the relationship, both physical and mental, and merely because, the relationship had now turned sour, it cannot be inferred that the physical relationship established with her, on every occasion, was against her will and without her consent,” the judge held..The complaint by the woman stated that after they started their relationship in 2013, the applicant sometimes performed forcible intercourse on her at various placed in Mumbai. She permitted the same on the assurance of marriage being solemnized; however, whenever she asked about it, he would refuse.Later, they started residing separately and the relationship severed. The applicant thereafter allegedly forwarded some obscene messages to her and made bad comments against her character. She then lodged a complaint which resulted in an FIR invoking under Sections 376 (rape) and 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act..A chargesheet was filed and during the stage of framing of charges, the accused moved for discharge from the case. He argued that he had been in a prolonged relationship of 8 years with the woman and the physical relationship had been established with her consent.A sessions court at Mumbai rejected the discharge application in 2019, which led to the present revision application before the High Court.Justice Dangre held that refusing to discharge the applicant cannot justified merely based on an observation that the intercourse was forcible.The judge after taking into account the facts and circumstances quashed and set aside the order of the sessions court and discharged the applicant..[Read Order]