New Delhi:

The Delhi High Court has said that when a woman makes a reasonable choice to enter into a physical relationship, the consent cannot be said to be based on a misunderstanding unless there is clear evidence of a false promise of marriage.

Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta made the remarks while quashing a rape case against a man, noting that the matter had been resolved amicably between him and the woman, who Now married.

“It is important to note that whenever a woman makes a reasonable choice to enter into a physical relationship with full knowledge of the consequences of such action, consent cannot be said to be based on a misunderstanding of fact unless there is clear evidence that the maker A false promise was made with no intention of fulfilling it.”

“The said promise must be of direct relevance and directly related to the woman’s decision to engage in sexual intercourse,” the court said.

The woman filed a rape case against the man, accusing him of repeatedly having physical relations with her on the pretext of marriage, but later refused to marry, saying his family had engaged him to someone else.

The court later heard that the man and the complainant settled their dispute and married in court.

The complainant told the High Court that she had been living happily with the man and did not want to proceed with the FIR registered on “misunderstanding” as the accused was not willing to get married due to resistance from her family.

“Given the nature of the relationship between the plaintiff (male) and respondent No. 2 (female), any such alleged promise does not appear to have been made with malice or to deceive the respondent No. 2 but in view of the subsequent developments in the family, the petitioner,” the court explain.

The statement added that while the investigation was ongoing, the man voluntarily married the woman, so it could not be explained that the promise he initially made was a deliberate failure to fulfill it.

The court said that it cannot be ignored that quashing the proceedings would bring about greater marital harmony between the parties rather than continuing the proceedings under IPC Section 376 (punishment for rape) and increase the chances of conviction after trial considering the reconciliation between the couple. , everything seems distant and desolate.

“The continuance of the proceedings is nothing but an abuse of court process and will cause prejudice and destroy harmony between the parties,” the court said.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)