NW18 Madras High Court Warns Against Misuse of Law by Women, Calls for Balanced Justice

The Madras High Court recently observed that while men are often accused of exploiting women, in the legal conundrum, there are instances where unscrupulous women do misuse the law to their advantage.

In such cases, the court's responsibility is twofold: to ensure that women are not mistreated and to prevent the misuse of the law against men, stated single judge bench of Justice M. Dhandapani.

Court highlighted that though in Indian culture, women often hesitate to report sexual assault or physical abuse due to the lifelong stigma and thus courts must approach such cases with sensitivity, presuming women are not the aggressors, however, courts also have a duty to ensure that innocent men are not falsely accused, it stressed.

"The courts are to separate the grain from the chaff while analysing the evidence placed before it so that just and proper justice is rendered to the innocent person," said the bench.

The observations were made in a criminal appeal filed by a man against the trial court's judgment of conviction and sentence of 10 years in prison for him raping a woman under the false promise of marriage.

The high court overturned the trial court's judgment. It noted that the evidence presented by the alleged victim's side 'as a whole bristled with very many contradictions and interpolations'.

Regarding the charge under Section 375 of the IPC, the court observed that since the prosecutrix consented to the sexual intercourse and was aware beforehand that the accused was married, the alleged promise of marriage leading to any misconception could not be upheld.

'...prosecutrix willingly consented to having the alleged sexual intercourse not because of the alleged promise of marriage, but for reasons other than that," court pointed out. 

Court held that consent under Section 375 of the IPC necessitates voluntary participation based on informed understanding and awareness of the act's moral implications and in the case at hand, the evidence suggested the prosecutrix's informed consent, understanding the situation despite the accused being married and a father. 

Therefore, now the prosecutrix cannot turn back and claim that the consent was only predicated upon the promise of marriage, court said.

Court allowed the man's appeal and set aside his conviction for the offence punishable u/s 375/376 and 417 of the IPC.

Case Title: Rahul Gandhi v. State