The Karnataka High Court has ruled that no amount of consent or a consensual relationship grants a person the license to assault their partner, in a recent judgement partially allowing a petition.
However, the court quashed charges of rape and cheating on the promise of marriage. The petitioner and the complainant both were colleagues at a software company and had been in a relationship for over five years.
In July 2022, the woman filed a police complaint alleging that the petitioner had engaged in a physical relationship with her under the promise of marriage and then breached this promise.
The Annapoorneshwari Nagar police registered an FIR under IPC sections 376 (rape), 417 (punishment for cheating), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace), and 506 (criminal intimidation).
The petitioner claimed that the complainant had previously registered a similar complaint against another man in February 2020, alleging that he had also engaged in sexual acts under the promise of marriage. According to the petitioner, the 2020 case is still pending, and the complainant is habitual in filing repeated complaints against different men. The complainant did not appear before the high court. Justice Nagaprasanna noted that the rape and cheating charges could not be sustained in the context of a consensual relationship.
ALSO READ
GRATUITY’S NOT GUILTY
“The facts obtaining in the case at hand is considered on the bedrock of the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in the Shambhu Karwar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh case. The offence of rape is loosely laid against the petitioner, and if further investigation is permitted to continue against the present petitioner as is continuing against the other man, it would be permitting the complainant to sail in two different complaints at the same time. Therefore, the offence of rape could not have been laid against the petitioner. It needs to be obliterated,” the court said.
Justice Nagaprasanna reviewed the wound certificate, which indicated multiple bruises on the complainant’s body.
“The bruises are on account of assault by the accused, the petitioner. Therefore, while the offence under IPC sections 376 or 417 cannot be made out, the offence under IPC sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 504 are, prima facie, met,” the court said, adding that the petitioner is free to pursue any legal remedies available if the investigation leads to the filing of the charge sheet.
We strive to make a lasting impact on India’s policy and planning landscape through fair, unbiased, and incisive research based journalism.
But we can’t do it alone.
Together, we can create a better India, where policies are fair, planning is unbiased, and the truth prevails. Your contribution matters, and we shall be immensely grateful for your support.