Prolonged Cohabitation Suggests Willing Consent in Relationship: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has said that the court must not adopt a pedantic approach in a case of rape on false promise of marriage, rather it may, based on the length of such relationship and conduct of the parties, presume implied consent of the parties to be in a relationship regardless of their desire or a wish to convert it into a marital bond.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Manoj Misra said the long-drawn relationship and the circumstance of living together and cohabiting with each other would give rise to a presumption that their relationship was based on a valid consent.

Court allowed a plea by a man to quash a rape case lodged against him on the ground of promise of marriage.

In a long drawn live-in relationship, occasions may arise where parties in that relationship express their desire or wish to formalise the same by a seal of marriage, but that expression of desire, or wish, by itself would not be indicative of relationship being a consequence of that expression of desire or wish, the court said.

"A decade or two earlier, live-in relationships might not have been common. But now more and more women are financially independent and have the capacity to take conscious decision of charting their life on their own terms. This financial freedom, inter alia, has led to proliferation of such live-in relationships," the bench said.

Dealing with the appeal filed by Ravish Singh Rana against the Uttarakhand High Court's order refusing to quash the rape FIR, the bench noted the relationship between the appellant and the second respondent (the informant) had been there since 2021.

The court said, this relationship was not merely of knowing each other but of living together as a couple under one roof in a rented accommodation.

The FIR does not allege that the physical relationship was established only because there was a promise of marriage. Besides, the physical relationship continued for over two years without a complaint in between. In such circumstances, a presumption would arise of there being a valid consent for initiating and maintaining the physical relationship that spanned over two years, it noted.

"In our view, if two able-minded adults reside together as a live-in couple for more than a couple of years and cohabit with each other, a presumption would arise that they voluntarily chose that kind of a relationship fully aware of its consequences," the bench said.

Therefore, the allegation that such a relationship was entered into because there was a promise of marriage is unworthy of acceptance, particularly, when there is no allegation that such a physical relationship would not have been established had there been no promise to marry, the bench added.

In the case, the bench also held that the settlement agreement entered by the appellant and the informant on November 19, 2023, which was not disputed, pointed out that the parties had been in love.

"In such circumstances, we are of the view that on ground of refusal to marry, the appellant cannot be subjected to prosecution for the offence of rape. The other allegations of assault and abuse have not been supported by any material particulars. Even the alleged sexual assault on November 18, 2023 is negated by the recital in the settlement agreement that parties love each other," the bench said.

Court quashed the FIR lodged on November 23, 2023 with Khatima police station in Udham Singh Nagar district and the consequent proceedings, holding it as nothing but an abuse of the process.

It allowed the appeal and set aside the high court's order, which dismissed the appellant's application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20235 (equivalent to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973).

Case Title: Ravish Singh Rana Vs State of Uttarakhand & Anr

Download judgment here