The Supreme Court today observed that it is not entrusted with passing moral judgments on the choices made by adults in their personal relationships. The Court added that any undesirable consequences of such choices cannot automatically be transformed into criminal offences requiring State intervention.

“It is trite to reiterate at this stage that this Court has not been entrusted to pass moral judgement on the varying exercises of free choice, autonomy and agency by individuals in the country. Adult, men and women may freely make decisions that are wise or unwise, prudent or reckless and considerate or callous. These decisions would necessarily be accompanied by consequences, perhaps in the form of undesirable outcomes or unexpected possibilities, some even deeply hurtful. None of this would, however, transform these decisions and their resulting circumstances automatically into criminal offences requiring the intervention of the State apparatus,” the Court observed.

The Court further cautioned that criminal law cannot be used as “munitions to settle personal scores, exact revenge or coerce an individual to act in any particular way.”

A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice R Mahadevan made these observations while discharging a man from criminal proceedings alleging rape on false promise, cheating and bigamy, arising from a relationship with a woman who alleged that he had concealed his existing marriage and represented himself as a bachelor before marrying her.

The Court noted that the woman came to know within six months that the man was married and had kids, yet continued to live with him for seven years. This conduct undermined her claim that she believed herself to be his lawfully wedded wife, the Court observed.

The Court concluded that the relationship and the sexual acts were consensual and the man merely decided to withdraw from the relationship. This cannot lead to an inference of rape under section 376(2)(n) of IPC, the Court held.

The Court also expressed concern over “an increasing trend” of failed consensual relationships being converted into criminal cases, observing that settlements in such disputes often involve substantial monetary considerations to be borne by the male accused.

“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 judgment stated.

The Court, however, clarified that its observations should not be understood as diminishing the seriousness of genuine allegations of sexual assault and rape. It emphasised that rape remains heavily underreported and that genuine cases must be pursued vigorously where the facts establish sexual assault and violence.

It also acknowledged that in a country like India, a woman's consent to sexual intimacy may be conditional on her belief that she is entering into a legally recognised marriage.

“While it is indubitably true that in a country like ours, where social and cultural values place a significant premium on the institution of marriage, a woman may repose complete faith in her partner and consent to physical intimacy on the assurance that such a relationship is either a precursor to a legally and socially sanctioned union or formed on the explicit basis of such a union. Marriage itself then forms the very substratum of her decision to engage in a sexual relationship, making her consent conditional on the belief in its validity”, the Court observed.

Where she is genuinely kept unaware of her partner's existing marriage, such consent may stand vitiated, the Court said. The Court emphasised that the application of this principle must depend on the facts and evidence of each case, rather than mere allegations or moral presumptions.

“It is conceivable that such consent may stand vitiated if it is subsequently revealed that the woman was genuinely kept in the dark entirely about the true nature of her marriage, and that the husband had been married earlier, entirely unknown to her. There are certainly such genuine cases where trust is betrayed and dignity is compromised, lest the protective mantle of Section 376 along with Sections 493, 494 and 495 of the IPC would be rendered illusory for women who are truly wronged. However, the application of this principle must be guided by facts and evidence in each case, and not by mere allegations or moral presumptions”, the Court emphasised.

In the present case, the Court held that the material on record did not establish that the complainant continued to believe herself to be his legally wedded wife or that the ingredients of the offences alleged against him were made out. It also observed that the mere fact that the relationship had turned sour and acrimonious could not retrospectively convert earlier consensual sexual acts into rape.

Allowing the appeals, the Court set aside the orders of the Kerala High Court and the Trial Court and discharged the appellant from the offences alleged against him.

Also from the judgment – False Rape Accusation After Breakup Deprives Man Of Agency, Binds Him To Relationship Indefinitely : Supreme Court