Married woman can’t accuse man of rape on promise of marriage: SC | India News
NEW DELHI: SC has ruled that a married woman cannot accuse a man of rape on promise of marriage while her own marriage is still subsisting, and quashed a rape case filed by her against a man.The case involved a Muslim woman, mother of a four-year-old, residing at her parents’ home in Maharashtra’s Satara. She developed a relationship with her 23-year-old neighbour, a BSc student.In her police complaint alleging rape on the promise of marriage, she claimed that the man maintained a physical relationship with her from June 8, 2022, to July 8, 2023, assuring her repeatedly that he would marry her after her divorce. She obtained a ‘khulanama’ (divorce) from herdhananjay.mahapatra husband only on Dec 29, 2022.After FIRs were lodged, the man approached HC for quashing the case, but failed. He moved SC, where a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish C Sharma found inconsistencies in the woman’s narrative and conduct.“The complainant alleged the appellant had physical relations with her without consent. However, she not only sustained the relationship for a year but also visited him at lodges on two occasions. Her conduct does not corroborate her allegations,” court said.The bench highlighted that the woman was still married during part of the relationship. Writing the judgment, Justice Sharma noted, “Khulanama was executed on Dec 29, 2022. It is inconceivable she entered a physical relationship with the appellant on promise of marriage while still married. Such a promise was illegal & unenforceable.”The court observed that the complaint seemed to have been filed after the man graduated, returned to his hometown Ahmednagar, and a visit by the woman led to a confrontation with his family.Quashing the police cases, SC said, “No reasonable possibility exists that a married woman with a four-year-old child would be continuously deceived or maintain a prolonged association with someone who sexually assaulted her. A consensual relationship turning sour cannot invoke state’s criminal machinery.”
