News Updates

Consenting Adults Indulging In Sexual Relationship Are Fully Aware Of Consequences And Must Bear Results: Bombay HC [Read Judgment]

Apoorva Mandhani
10 Jan 2017 4:53 PM GMT
Consenting Adults Indulging In Sexual Relationship Are Fully Aware Of Consequences And Must Bear Results: Bombay HC [Read Judgment]
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

Discharging a man of rape charges, the High Court of Bombay recently relied on an earlier ruling, reiterating that two consenting adults consciously entering into a physical relationship are fully aware of the consequences, and must bear the same.

“The prosecutrix at the time of filing the complaint was 30years old and was nearly 25 to 26 years old when the first incident of sexual intercourse took place. Thus, she was aware of the consequences of keeping sexual relations with a man and she was also aware that there may be differences between two persons and they may find each other compatible. The girl was highly educated and also 25 years old. Therefore, the consent cannot be said to have been obtained by fraud,” Justice Mridula Bhatkar observed.

The Court was hearing a Petition filed by Mr. Kunal Mandaliya, demanding that he be discharged from offences punishable under Section 376 (Rape), 420 (Cheating), 323 (Voluntarily causing hurt) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code.

The complainant woman, who was a lecturer in a college, had claimed that she had consented to the sexual relationship only because of the promised marriage. She had then lodged the police complaint against him when he went back on his word, and often assaulted her. She had further alleged cheating on the ground that the petitioner had asked her for money on several occasions, which she had to pay under duress, and was hence cheated on by him.

The Petitioner had however contended that they had indulged in a sexual relationship with due consent, and had denied all charges of rape, cheating, hurt and intimidation.

The Court accepted the contentions put forth by the petitioner, and discharge him of charges of rape. It however refused to quash charges of cheating, criminal intimidation and assault against him.

Read the Judgment here.

This article has been made possible because of financial support from Independent and Public-Spirited Media Foundation.
Next Story