Consensual sex for 5 years can’t be termed rape, if it does not culminate into marriage: HC

The complainant woman and the man were in a relationship for five years. The relationship turned sour after the families could not resolve caste differences.

In an important judgment, the Karnataka High Court has held that a consensual sexual relationship for five years does not amount to rape just because it does not culminate into a marriage.

A single-judge Bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that a 35-year old man and the complainant-woman were in love and had sexual intercourse several times over a period of five years.

"The consent in the case at hand is not once, twice or thrice; not for days or months; but for several years, five year precisely, as is narrated in the complaint as the two were in love. Therefore, for five long years, it cannot be said that the consent of a woman has been taken for having such instances, all along against her will," Justice Nagaprasanna held.

The court according to reports noted that talks of marriage did take place, but failed due to cast equations.

"The statement clearly records that he had made hectic efforts to get married to the complainant. The family of both the parties were known to each other. Talks of marriage did take place, but failed. The failure was on account of consensus not being arrived due to caste equations," the judge said.

The court then quashed the rape case filed by the woman against the man.

The prosecution pointed out that the man and woman were initially friends and then their relationship developed into a love affair.

The couple apart from indulging in physical relations for five years also engaged in several financial transactions.

The relationship however turned sour after both the families could not arrive at a consensus on marriage owing to caste reasons.

The High Court noted that the relationship was consensual in nature and there was no force as alleged while maintaining physical relations.

Though the complainant woman said that the accused initially had forcible sexual intercourse with her, the judge rejected the same while highlighting that such sexual relationship continued for five long years and hence, cannot be termed as non-consensual.

"The narration would clearly indicate that the relationship between him and the complainant was consensual. If it is consensual, it cannot be alleged that it would become an ingredient of rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, for it to become punishable under Section 376," the single-judge Bench held.

The Bench also added that it is the length of the relationship and the acts ion such period of such relationship between the two that takes away the rigour of ingredients of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (rape).

The Bench then quashed the chargesheet and criminal proceedings initiated against the man.