The Kerala High Court recently stated that a relationship turning sour does not amount to rape while granting bail to a Central Government Counsel, Advocate Navneeth N Nath, who was accused of sexual assault by a colleague. The court clarified that a failed relationship alone does not justify rape charges.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, who presided over the case, noted that romantic relationships have evolved, with many young adults opting for live-in arrangements and open marriages. The judge emphasized that just because a relationship did not work out, it does not automatically lead to rape charges. The critical factor is whether sexual consent was obtained based on a false promise of marriage.
“A relationship turning sour at a later point of time will not amount to rape. In the present social context, we have live-in relationships and open marriages. However, the difficulty arises when allegations of rape surface after these relationships end,” said Justice Thomas.
The court noted that these changing dynamics have led to an increase in rape allegations after breakups. However, this does not always mean that one partner was forced into sexual relations under a false promise of marriage.
The judge granted bail to Navneeth N Nath, considering his status as a Central Government Counsel and the improbability of him fleeing justice. Additional factors supporting the bail decision included the lack of criminal history, the near-completion of the investigation, and the absence of the need for further evidence recovery.
The court also emphasized that the observations made during the bail hearing are specific to the bail plea and do not impact the merits of the case in future proceedings.
Navneeth N Nath was arrested under Sections 376(2)(n) and 313 of the Indian Penal Code following allegations from his colleague, who claimed that their sexual relationship was based on a false promise of marriage. The complainant stated they had been in a relationship for four years, but she discovered he was engaged to another woman when she saw them together at a hotel. This led to her attempting suicide, after which the incident was reported to the police.
Further investigation revealed that the complainant was forced to undergo two abortions, leading to additional charges under Section 313 IPC. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail, arguing that the consent was obtained based on a misconception, constituting rape. However, Senior Advocate Ramesh Chander, representing the accused, argued that the relationship was consensual and that the accused had intended to marry the complainant.
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
