The Allahabad High Court ruled that grabbing a minor girl’s breasts or snapping her pyjama string does not count as an attempt to rape, but it qualifies as aggravated sexual assault under the POCSO Act.
The Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that non-consensual unnatural sex by a husband with his adult wife is not an offence under IPC Sections 375 or 377, citing legal exceptions for marital relationships.
The Allahabad High Court stated that in modern times, it cannot be assumed that victims always tell the full truth in rape cases, as it granted bail to a man accused of exploiting a married woman.
Allahabad High Court ruled that a long-term consensual physical relationship based on mutual understanding and without deceit from the beginning cannot be considered rape under IPC Section 375.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that live-in couples are entitled to legal protection from threats, even if one partner is already married. However, minors in live-in relationships are not eligible for protection under the law.
The Allahabad High Court ruled that if a woman agrees to a sexual relationship under fear or false promises, it still counts as rape. The court refused to cancel proceedings against a man accused of rape under the pretext of marriage.
The Uttarakhand High Court ruled that a husband cannot be charged with rape for anal sex with his wife, as such acts fall under marital consent protected by law.
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a rape accused, stating that the victim knowingly went to his house after drinking and was aware of her actions. The court said both parties were adults and highlighted doubts in the victim’s claims.
The Kerala High Court ruled that consensual sex without any false promise or misunderstanding is not rape. The Court dropped charges against a man after finding that the relationship was voluntary and not based on deceit.
The Allahabad High Court upheld the acquittal of a man in a rape case, stating that both parties share the burden of proof. The court highlighted inconsistencies in the complainant’s claims and ruled that the allegations lacked sufficient evidence.
