NEW DELHI: A woman who is in a live-in relationship for a long period may not be able to accuse her live-in partner of compelling her to get into physical relation on
false promise of marriage
in order to face
rape charges
as SC said in such a situation it cannot be said with certaintity that physical relation was purely because of the promise.
While quashing criminal proceedings against a bank official who was accused of rape charges by his live-in partner, a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta refused to accept the plea of the woman, a lecturer, who alleged that she continued to have sexual relations with him for 16 years on the basis of his marriage promise. The court said both the partners were well educated and it was a
consensual relationship
as both of them used to visit each other residences even when they were posted in different towns. It is a clear case of a love affair/live-in relationship gone sour, it said.
“It is hard to believe that the complainant kept on bending to the demands of the appellant for a period of nearly 16 years without raising any protest to any quarter that the appellant was exploiting her sexually under the pretext of a false promise of marriage. The prolonged period of 16 years during which the sexual relations continued unabatedly between the parties, is sufficient to conclude that there was never an element of force or deceit in the relationship,” the bench said.
Court said in such cases even if it is assumed that a false promise was made, the fact that the relation continued for such a long period would render the plea of the complainant, that her consent for all these years was under misconception of the fact that the accused would marry her, implausible.
