The Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court has ruled that just because a woman books a hotel room and goes inside with a man, it does not mean she agreed to have sex with him. The Court emphasized that consent for sexual activity must be clear, and simply being in a hotel room with someone is not enough to assume that.
Justice Bharat P Deshpande said that even if the woman helped book the hotel room and entered it with the man, this cannot be taken as consent for sexual intercourse. The Court strongly rejected the earlier decision by the trial court that had dismissed the rape charges on this basis.
This case began in March 2020. The accused, Gulsher Ahmed, allegedly offered the woman a job abroad and asked her to come to a hotel to meet an employment agency. Once inside the room, the woman claimed that Ahmed threatened to kill her and then raped her. She escaped while he was in the bathroom and reported the incident to the police.
Ahmed was arrested and charged under Sections 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. However, in March 2021, the trial court dismissed the charges, saying the woman had willingly entered the hotel room and had therefore consented to sex.
The High Court overturned this ruling, calling it a serious mistake. It noted that there is a big difference between going into a room without protest and actually giving consent to what happens inside. The woman’s immediate actions—running out, crying, and calling the police—clearly showed that the act was not consensual.
The hotel staff also supported the woman’s statement. The High Court ruled that just because the woman didn’t protest entering the room or had lunch with the man earlier doesn’t mean she agreed to any sexual act. The Court has now restored the trial against the accused.
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==
