Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Kerala High Court recently quashed a rape case against a man, ruling that the belief that Indian women do not make false allegations of sexual assault cannot be followed blindly without assessing the truth in each case.

The court, presided over by Justice A. Badharudeen, expressed concern over the rising trend of registration of false sexual assault cases. The court stated that while the assumption that women do not file such cases was once valid, recent cases show false accusations are sometimes made to settle scores or exert pressure for compliance of demands.

The court noted: “In cases where sexual assault has been alleged, the said concept has been carried for the past so many years, on the premise that, in Indian society, any girl would not make any allegation of sexual assault or any other mode of misconduct against a person, as the same would prejudice the right of the girl or woman, as the case may be. However, in recent years, this concept seems to be diluted and in less percentage of the complaints in this line, wherein allegation of rape, sexual molestation and other misconduct projected are without any iota of truth, so as to settle a score and also to compel the persons against whom allegations are made to heed the illegal demands of the complainants. Therefore, this concept could not be followed blindly without analyzing the truth of the allegations in case to case basis.”

The case stemmed from a First Information Report (FIR), filed by the second respondent, alleging that the accused/ petitioner had sexually assaulted the complainant multiple times between May 30, 2014, and April 20, 2019, under the false promise of marriage.

The accused, charged under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), sought to quash the case, arguing that the allegations were false and that the relationship was consensual. The accused pointed out that the complaint was filed belatedly in 2019, despite no contact between the petitioner and the complainant for three years. The petitioner further noted that a similar complaint had been filed in 2016 but was not pursued after he allegedly reassured the complainant of marriage.

The complainant, in the present case, submitted an affidavit stating she had no objection to quashing the proceedings. However, the State opposed the plea, arguing that the FIR contained prima facie allegations of rape, and the prosecution should be allowed to present its evidence.

The court, highlighting the inconsistencies in the complainant’s conduct, noted: “when there is a complaint as to commission of rape on the promise of marriage, again withdrawing from prosecution awaiting marriage, that too for a period of three years, without having any contact in between the parties is not digestible to prudence.”

The court allowed the plea for quashing the case against the petitioner, stating that “the relationship between the defacto complainant and petitioner was purely consensual in nature. In such view of the matter, no materials made out in this matter to attract the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC.”

 

Cause Title: Ajith v State of Kerala and Another [CRL.MC NO. 1124 OF 2020]

Appearance: For the Petitioner-  Advocate U.K. Devidas; For the Complainant- Advocate K.V. Bhadra Kumari; For the State - Public Prosecutor Jibu T.S.