Supreme Court Rules Consensual Intimacy Cannot Be Branded as Rape When Relationships End

Consensual physical intimacy during a functioning relationship cannot be branded as rape later simply because the association broke or soured, the Supreme Court ruled on Friday. A Bench of Justices B. V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan discharged a Kerala man from charges of rape, cheating, and a second marriage during the subsistence of the first.

The Ruling

The top court expressed strong concern over a rising trend where failed relationships are retrospectively examined to find grounds for sexual assault and violence charges. The Bench noted that courts and society must discourage the misuse of criminal law after an emotional discord between two consenting adults. It stated that experiencing regret over past sexual acts due to the later end of a relationship does not make it a crime, nor does it justify putting the criminal justice system in motion to harm the accused person's liberty and reputation.

Court Observations

The judges pointed out that treating every broken consensual relationship as rape dilutes the gravity of the serious offence and causes irreparable stigma and harassment to the accused. The Bench highlighted that rape remains heavily underreported and strikes at the core of a woman's bodily autonomy, meaning genuine cases of sexual assault must be pursued with vigour. The court noted that settlement of such disputes often involves huge monetary demands borne by the male accused.

Case Background

The man had approached the Supreme Court after the Kerala High Court dismissed his plea to quash the proceedings and his discharge petition. According to the prosecution, the woman alleged that the man married her at Mysuru while his earlier marriage was still valid, and that they cohabited from 1996 until 2003. She claimed he obtained her consent for sexual intercourse through fraud and deceit by concealing his previous marriage.

Context

India's criminal laws treat sexual consent obtained by fraud, such as through a false promise of marriage, as a serious offence distinct from consensual relationships that simply fail over time. The Supreme Court frequently hears petitions where individuals seek to quash criminal proceedings arising from personal and domestic disputes after romantic partnerships end. This ruling highlights the legal distinction between deceitful inducement at the start of a relationship and ordinary emotional regret after a breakup.