[News 18] Sexual Assault case victims entitled to fair trial but accused have to be protected from mala fide trial: High Court

While deciding appeals against the trial court's order discharging a man for the crime of rape, the Delhi High Court on Monday ruled that it is the court's responsibility to maintain a balance between the established law of sexual assault and the equality standards of the complainant and the accused.

The single judge bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma held that “courts have to ensure the right of a fair trial to the complainant and rights of accused of being protected from mala fide trial are taken care of to ensure equality before the law”.

Justice Sharma made the remarks while upholding a trial court order discharging an accused under Sections 376 (punishment for sexual assault) and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, in a 2017 FIR.

The high court said, “In cases of rape, sexual violence and effective enforcement of sexual assault laws, the conceptualisation of definition of sexual consent is of utmost importance so that the delicate balance between rape and consensual sex is fairly arrived at in such complaints and cases. The issue of consent, thus, merits close scrutiny for analysis of sexual assault offences.”

According to the prosecution, the woman and the accused met on a train in 2005, became friends, and the defendant began paying her house visits. In November 2005, the man gave her juice, after which she remained unconscious, and when she regained consciousness, she realized he had engaged in sexual activity with her.

The woman claimed she was frequently raped by the man between 2005 and 2017, she filed the FIR at the Sarai Rohilla Police Station in 2017.

During the investigation, the prosecutrix indicated that her son and daughter were the results of her physical interaction with the accused. The lawsuit also said that the defendant threatened to disclose her video and obscene images to her family and forced her to engage in sexual contact with him multiple times till 2017.

The accused was discharged by the Trial Court

The High Court noted that the prosecutrix and the defendant engaged in a continuous sexual connection for 12 years while being married to separate partners.

The court also highlighted that there was no continuing threat of images and films being exposed to the victim's family, as the mobile phone was never retrieved and the prosecutor never provided a description of the device.

The court noted that the repeated visits of the accused to the home of the prosecutrix and her repeated visits to the official residence of the accused demonstrated both direct and implied consent to the sexual relationship.

“It is not a case where the accused exploited or abused any disability or lack of power of the complainant or abused power or had put her under any fear of injury due to which she carried on with the relationship for 12 years and after 12 years had reported the matter to the police and also had voluntarily disclosed herself that the two children were fathered by the accused.”, the Court observed.

Consequently, the High Court upheld the order of the Trial Court discharging the accused. However, the Court noted that it was examining the applicability of legislation in the context of this case, given its unique circumstances, and that it was not establishing a statute regarding consent for all rape cases.

“No doubt, in cases of rape depending on facts from case to case, consent cannot be said to be inferred or proved by passivity or silence alone from the complainant. However, continuous consent, as in the present, without any whisper of complaint assists the Court in consent analysis,” the court said.

Case Title: X vs. State