Madras HC Acquits Rape Convict After Complainant Has Second Child With Him While Case Was Adjourned For Mediation, Says There Are No Rules In Love And War
The Madras High Court acquitted a man previously convicted of rape after it came to light that the complainant, who had initially accused the man of rape in 2014, ended up having a second child with him during the mediation process.
The case dates back to 2014 when the complainant filed a rape complaint against the man, leading to his conviction. By 2017, he had challenged this conviction in court.
During the appeal process, the Court was concerned about the welfare of the child born from the complainant's earlier accusation. To address this concern, the matter was referred to mediation in hopes of finding a resolution regarding the child's future. However, the mediation did not yield a solution for the child already born. Instead, it resulted in the complainant and the convicted man having another child together.
A Bench of Justice N. Seshasayee said, “There are no rules in love and war and so say the same and this case perhaps stands as a testimony to this statement. Neither prosecution nor conviction separated the prosecutrix and the appellant. At the end of the day, parties are adults and the constitution of the country does not make a moralistic statement, wherein grant citizens their life to live and if the prosecutrix and the appellant choose their way to live on their free will.”
Advocate R Ragavendran appeared for the appellant, while Government Advocate Dr. CE Pratap appeared for the respondent.
The State confirmed the birth of the second child, presenting the child's birth certificate in court. This development led the Court to reevaluate the case. The Court noted, “When the appeal was preferred, this Court tried to find what best could be done to the child born to the prosecutrix through the appellant, for which purpose it referred the matter to mediation. The result of the mediation was not a solution for the child that was already born, but on the contrary ended up with them having a second child.”
The Court acknowledged that the complainant might have misused the judicial system by initiating a false FIR. However, the Court chose not to revisit this aspect and focused on the case's merits. It added, “Indeed, she did not level any accusation against the appellant till she begotten child. Significantly, the prosecutrix was an adult and she knew or atleast ought to know that what she was engaging in. The trial Court, however, overlooked this part of the cross examination of PW1.”
Ultimately, the Court allowed the appeal, acquitting the man of all charges.
Cause Title: G. Selvam v. The State
Click here to read/download Judgment
