Home > Recent Judgements > Physical Relationships Must Be Proven To Be Based Only On Marriage Promises, Despite Rape On False Marriage Promises
Nov 27, 2024
BACKGROUND
In the case between Mahesh Damu Khare Vs. The State of Maharashtra, the case arose out of a relationship that apparently existed between the complainant and the appellant for a period of 10 years during which the woman accused the man of having had sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marrying her. When it was all over, the lady filed an FIR against the man alleging that he had raped her, for her agreement was obtained under a false pretence. According to the man, there was no such sex and the relationship was consensual and such allegations arose only when he stopped financially supporting the woman. The Supreme Court annulled the FIR stating that long- term relations sustained without persistent objection had all the characteristics of a voluntary agreement and that criminal liability cannot be affixed where no evidence was adduced to demonstrate that the sexual relationship was only to the promise of marriage.
ISSUES
- Whether the physical relationship between the appellant and the complainant was consensual or based solely on a false promise of marriage?
- Whether the complainant’s consent to the physical relationship was vitiated due to a misconception of fact caused by the appellant’s alleged false promise of marriage?
- Whether the allegations made by the complainant were motivated by the breakdown of the relationship and the cessation of financial assistance?
JUDGEMENT
The Supreme Court quashed the FIR for rape against the accused, emphasizing that a consensual sexual relationship over a prolonged period cannot automatically be deemed as induced by a false promise of marriage. The Court also made it clear, however, that in the case where the offender abuses a woman on false promise of marriage, there existed no false consideration of marriage for the woman and other factors influenced the consent. In terms of the implications of the order the court expressed concern at the growing tendency to criminalize conduct after the end of the relevant relationship and cautioned against retrospective application of the notion of criminality to the existing relationship because the process of law can be misused and the affected persons can be unnecessarily involved in criminal litigation.
OBSERVATION
The Supreme Court clarified that a consensual sexual relationship does not amount to rape on the false promise of marriage unless it is established that the woman’s consent was solely based on the man’s promise to marry her, without being influenced by other considerations. The Court emphasized that prolonged consensual relationships, maintained without consistent protest, cannot be retroactively criminalized when they turn sour, as doing so risks misusing criminal law for personal grievances. It also expressed concern over the growing trend of criminal cases being lodged against men after the breakdown of long-term consensual relationships, cautioning that such allegations must be scrutinized to prevent the misuse of criminal jurisprudence in civil disputes.
For more information or queries, please email us at
[email protected]
