Live-In Relationship Between Two Adults Married To Other People Is Not A Legal Offence But Woman Cannot Later Claim Rape On Pretext Of Marriage - Delhi HC
A Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma has observed that a live-in relationship between two individuals married to other people may not align with societal norms or expectations, but it is not a legal offence.
In furtherance, the Court clarified that if a woman is not legally eligible to marry someone due to her existing marriage to another person, she cannot allege rape by claiming that she was induced into a sexual relationship under the false pretext of marriage.
Counsel S Selva appeared for the petitioner, while ASC Rupali Bandhopadhya, among others, appeared for the respondents.
In this case, a man approached the Court seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against him for the offence of rape on allegations by a woman that he established sexual relations with her on the false pretext of marriage. They were in a live-in relationship while being married to other people.
The Court observed that the complainant's decision to continue the relationship after getting to know about the marriage of the petitioner pointed towards her consent towards maintaining the relationship, despite knowing that they could not have gotten legally married to each other.
The Court also reprimanded the derogatory language used by the petitioner in the petition as well as written submissions, which fell short of the decency expected in legal pleadings. In that context, it was said that, "The legal ethics necessitate refraining from the use of such derogatory or offensive language as has been used by the petitioner in the petition as well as written submissions and oral submissions. While exercising judicial restraint, this Court does not wish to record any further observations in this regard, however, this Court observes that use of derogatory and offensive language should be avoided while filing any pleadings in a Court of law, whether against a man, woman or any gender."
The Bench also refrained from commenting on the morality of such relationships, observing that it means different things to different people and the Courts of law cannot impose their own perception of morality on individuals who are adults and make free adult choices if such choices are not illegal or an offence under the present framework of law.
It was further observed that the Indian legal framework does not extend its benevolence and protection to people who voluntarily enter into unions or acts for which protection of law is not available. In that context, it was said that, "when the victim herself is not legally eligible to marry someone else due to her existing marriage to another partner, she cannot claim to have been induced into a sexual relationship under false pretext of marriage. Thus, the protection and remedies available under Section 376 of the IPC cannot be extended to a victim who was not legally entitled to marry the person with whom she was in sexual relationship with."
Quashing the FIR, the Court strongly said that it was a dangerous proposition to attach criminality to acts that have not been legislated against on the basis of perceived morality.
Cause Title: S Rajadurai vs State of Delhi & Anr.
Click here to read/download the Judgment
