<p>Lucknow: In a significant ruling, the <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/allahabad-high-court">Allahabad High Court</a> said that failure to fulfil a promise of marriage after prolonged period of sexual relations does not constitute rape.</p><p>A single bench comprising Justice Avinash Saxena gave the ruling recently while allowing a petition challenging registration of a case of rape lodged against one Ajay Saini by a woman who claimed that the former had sexually assaulted her after giving her a sedative-laced drink and later continued to sexually exploit her for three years with the promise of marriage.</p><p>‘’The present case is not a case where the appellant lured respondent No.2 (woman) solely for physical pleasures and then vanished. The relationship continued for a period of three long years, which is a considerable period of time. They remained close and emotionally involved. In such cases, physical intimacy that occurred during the course of a functioning relationship cannot be retrospectively branded as instances of offence of rape merely because the relationship failed to culminate in marriage,’’ the court said.</p>.'We are old fashioned': Supreme Court asks boys and girls to be careful about pre-marital physical relationships .<p>‘’Thus, in a situation where a physical relationship is maintained for a prolonged period knowingly by the woman, it cannot be said with certainty that the said physical relationship was purely because of the alleged promise made by the appellant to marry her. Thus, unless it can be shown that the physical relationship was purely because of the promise of marriage, thereby having a direct nexus with the physical relationship without being influenced by any other consideration, it cannot be said that there was vitiation of consent under misconception of fact,’’ it added.</p><p>This Court said that it had, on numerous occasions, taken note of the disquieting tendency wherein failed or broken relationships were given the colour of criminality.</p><p>‘’The offence of rape, being of the gravest kind, must be invoked only in cases where there exists genuine sexual violence, coercion, or absence of free consent. To convert every sour relationship into an offence of rape not only trivialises the seriousness of the offence but also inflicts upon the accused indelible stigma and grave injustice. The misuse of the criminal justice machinery in this regard is a matter of profound concern and calls for condemnation,’’ the court said.</p>
<p>Lucknow: In a significant ruling, the <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/allahabad-high-court">Allahabad High Court</a> said that failure to fulfil a promise of marriage after prolonged period of sexual relations does not constitute rape.</p><p>A single bench comprising Justice Avinash Saxena gave the ruling recently while allowing a petition challenging registration of a case of rape lodged against one Ajay Saini by a woman who claimed that the former had sexually assaulted her after giving her a sedative-laced drink and later continued to sexually exploit her for three years with the promise of marriage.</p><p>‘’The present case is not a case where the appellant lured respondent No.2 (woman) solely for physical pleasures and then vanished. The relationship continued for a period of three long years, which is a considerable period of time. They remained close and emotionally involved. In such cases, physical intimacy that occurred during the course of a functioning relationship cannot be retrospectively branded as instances of offence of rape merely because the relationship failed to culminate in marriage,’’ the court said.</p>.'We are old fashioned': Supreme Court asks boys and girls to be careful about pre-marital physical relationships .<p>‘’Thus, in a situation where a physical relationship is maintained for a prolonged period knowingly by the woman, it cannot be said with certainty that the said physical relationship was purely because of the alleged promise made by the appellant to marry her. Thus, unless it can be shown that the physical relationship was purely because of the promise of marriage, thereby having a direct nexus with the physical relationship without being influenced by any other consideration, it cannot be said that there was vitiation of consent under misconception of fact,’’ it added.</p><p>This Court said that it had, on numerous occasions, taken note of the disquieting tendency wherein failed or broken relationships were given the colour of criminality.</p><p>‘’The offence of rape, being of the gravest kind, must be invoked only in cases where there exists genuine sexual violence, coercion, or absence of free consent. To convert every sour relationship into an offence of rape not only trivialises the seriousness of the offence but also inflicts upon the accused indelible stigma and grave injustice. The misuse of the criminal justice machinery in this regard is a matter of profound concern and calls for condemnation,’’ the court said.</p>