A relationship turning bitter can not result in rape costs in opposition to a person: Kerala HC

By Express News Service

KOCHI: The Kerala High Court, on Thursday, orally noticed {that a} relationship between a person and a lady turning bitter can not result in rape costs in opposition to the person. The remark was made when the bail software was filed by Navaneeth N Nath, a Central Government Counsel of the High Court and an accused in a rape case, got here up for listening to.

Senior Advocate Ramesh Chander, counsel for the petitioner submitted that in an period when residing collectively is the style, a subsequent withdrawal of 1 individual from the corporate of one other even after having sexual activity, through the time they lived collectively is not going to give rise to a case of rape. It is simply a mere breach of promise and won’t appeal to the offence of rape. He additionally submitted that no person has a case the place the sufferer allowed herself to have sexual relations after the petitioner promised that he would marry her.

Refuting the allegation of the prosecution concerning forceful abortion, the counsel additionally submitted that the complainant herself acquired admitted to the hospital for abortion and it was executed along with her consent. If the case is that she has not given consent, then the investigation crew ought to have implicated the hospital authorities for doing it.  

The courtroom additionally identified that now there are cases that younger women and men residing collectively, having fun with relationships like in international international locations. It is simply after they perceive their bodily and psychological compatibility that they resolve to get married. At a later stage, in the event that they realise that they’re incompatible, they each could finish the connection. There could be conditions the place one in every of them prefers to proceed within the relationship however the different doesn’t. But all of those will not be conditions that may quantity to a case of rape. It could also be a breach of promise, however a breach of promise just isn’t rape.

After the conclusion of the argument of all events concerned within the case, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas reserved its order.

The prosecution argued that no matter consent was obtained was primarily based on a false impression of information, therefore the offence of rape will likely be attracted on this case.

The courtroom orally noticed relationships have advanced over time and that youths today have a special outlook on relationships however the truth that the connection didn’t work out is not going to prima facie appeal to the offence of rape. The change in relationships has led to an growing variety of rape allegations being raised after these {couples} break up and marry others. 

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that he meant to marry the complainant and that the sexual relationship between them was fully consensual. He determined to marry one other lady, solely after their mother and father objected to the wedding between him and the complainant.

Opposing the bail plea, the counsel for the sufferer submitted that their sexual relationship was primarily based on an absolute promise to marry which has now proved to be false.