False Rape Accusation After Breakup Deprives Man Of Agency, Binds Him To Relationship Indefinitely : Supreme Court
| Physical intimacy during a relationship cannot be retrospectively branded as rape merely because the relationship soured.
The Supreme Court has held that the legislature never intended for consensual sexual acts between adults occurring during a mutually affectionate relationship to be retrospectively criminalised merely because the relationship came to an end.
The observation came while the Court discharged a man from charges in a rape case alleging sexual relations on a false promise to marry. The bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice R Mahadevan flagged a “disturbing trend in recent years” in which consensual relationships that have ended are retrospectively examined to identify what can post facto be construed as violence and sexual assault.
The Court drew a clear distinction between situations where an absence of consent built entirely on a “mirage of deceit and falsehood at the outset,” and “experience of regret for having consented to past sexual acts owing to the later demise of the relationship." The latter, while unfortunate, “cannot constitute a consensual relationship as a crime” or set the criminal justice system in motion in a manner that deprives the accused of liberty and reputation.
Such an approach, the Court said, “denudes the man of any agency entirely,” as the mere fact of having been in a consensual relationship at one point would bind him indefinitely to a relationship for fear of a later rape accusation.
“Such an approach denudes the man of any agency entirely as the mere factor 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. In such a scenario can it be said that the man has no right to withdraw from the relationship? Can the decision be termed as deceit or fraud? Clearly not,” the Court said.
Physical intimacy during the currency of a functioning relationship “cannot be retrospectively branded as [an] act of rape merely because the relationship soured and no longer subsists.”
The Court noted that it has repeatedly witnessed the trend of failed relationships 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.” Converting every soured consensual relationship into an accusation of rape “dilutes the gravity of the offence alleged or rather negates the very allegation of crime.”
At the same time, the Court underscored that rape “strikes at the core of a woman's bodily autonomy and dignity.” It acknowledged that rape offences remains heavily under-reported, with victims often choosing silence to protect their own and their families' honour and reputation. Genuine cases, therefore, “must be pursued with rigour where facts clearly show sexual assault and violence.” At the same time, the justice system must not be abused, to harass a person merely for ending a consensual relationship.