Flagging the "worrying trend" where long term consensual relationships, upon turning sour, were sought to be criminalised by invoking penal laws, the Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed an FIR lodged against a man for alleged offences of rape and cheating.
Noting that the relationship continued for nine long years in the case, the top court observed if criminality was to be attached to such prolonged physical relationship at a very belated stage, it could lead to serious consequences.
"It is evident from the large number of cases decided by this court dealing with similar matters as discussed above that there is a worrying trend that consensual relationships going on for prolonged period, upon turning sour, have been sought to be criminalised by invoking criminal jurisprudence," a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh said.
The top court delivered its verdict on an appeal filed by a man, who had challenged a February 2018 order of the Bombay High Court which dismissed his plea seeking quashing of an FIR lodged against him at Navi Mumbai.
The woman had lodged the FIR alleging that the man had repeatedly exploited her sexually by giving false promises of marriage.
The top court noted the fact that the complainant continued to have physical relationship for a long time without any insistence on marriage would indicate the unlikelihood of any such promise made by the man for marrying her and it rather indicated that the relationship was consensual.
"In our opinion, the longer the duration of the physical relationship between the partners without protest and insistence by the female partner for marriage would be indicative of a consensual relationship rather than a relationship based on false promise of marriage by the male partner and thus, based on misconception of fact," it said.
"In our view, if a man is accused of having sexual relationship by making a false promise of marriage and if he is to be held criminally liable, any such physical relationship must be traceable directly to the false promise made and not qualified by other circumstances or consideration," it said.
The bench said such a prolonged continuation of physical relationship without demurral or remonstration by the female partner in effect takes out the sting of criminal culpability and neutralises it.
The top court made it clear that its decision in this case and observations made were to be understood in the factual matrix before the court.
"Every case must be decided on its own facts and circumstances, for we are dealing with human relationships and psychology which are dynamic and permeated with an array of unpredictable human emotions and sensitivities and hence, every decision relating to human relationships must be based on the peculiar facts and circumstances obtaining in the particular case," it said.
The bench said no prima facie case was made out about commission of an offence of rape and allowing the proceeding against the man to continue, where no criminal liability can be attached, would amount to abuse of the process of court.
While setting aside the high court order, the bench quashed the FIR lodged against the man.
The bench made it clear that quashing of the FIR would not be a bar to the complainant to seek any other remedy available under the law.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
