The Delhi High Court.
Credit: PTI File Photo
New Delhi: Societal norms dictate that sexual relations should ideally be within the confines of marriage but there is no wrongdoing if these happen between two consenting adults regardless of their marital status, the Delhi High Court has said, while granting bail to a married man accused of raping a woman on false pretext of marriage.
The court stated that the prosecutrix's decision to continue with the relationship even after she came to know about the accused's marital status, prima facie pointed towards her consent and no evidence was shown to corroborate that he had made any forceful relation.
"It is apparent that the prosecutrix was meeting the applicant for quite some time before the filing of the complaint and wanted to continue their relationship even after knowing the fact that the applicant is a married man.
"While societal norms dictate that sexual relations should ideally occur within the confines of marriage, no wrongdoing can be attributed if consensual sexual activity occurs between two consenting adults, regardless of their marital status," said Justice Amit Mahajan in an order passed on April 29.
In the order, the court noted that the FIR was registered almost after fifteen months from the first alleged incident and the prosecutrix's actions did not suggest any duress.
"It is apparent that the prosecutrix had taken a conscious decision after active application of mind to the things that had happened. Her actions at this stage do not suggest passive acquiescence under psychological duress but rather imply tacit consent, devoid of any misconception," stated the court.
The court further said although the alleged offence was heinous in nature, it cannot be lost sight of the fact that the object of jail is not punitive but to secure the presence of the accused during the trial.
It added that false allegations of sexual misconduct and coercion not only tarnish the reputation of the accused but also undermine the credibility of genuine cases and therefore it was imperative to exercise utmost diligence in evaluating the prima facie allegations against the accused in each case, especially when issues of consent and intent are contentious.
Noting that the applicant was aged about 34 years, having a wife and two minor children, and in custody since March 2023 and no useful purpose would be served in keeping him in jail.