Where is question of offence when there is consensual relationship? SC asks
New Delhi (PTI): Where is the question of an offence when a relationship is consensual? the Supreme Court on Monday asked a woman who had challenged an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that had quashed an FIR against her former live-in partner in a case of alleged sexual assault on a false promise of marriage.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan noted that the woman lived together with the man and also had a child from him.
"Where is the question of offence when there is a consensual relationship? They were living together and she also had a child from him and then there is no marriage and now, she says sexual assault? For 15 years they lived together," Justice Nagarathna remarked.
The woman's counsel told the court that she had lost her husband earlier and was introduced to the accused by her brother-in-law.
The court was also told that the accused had promised to marry her and sexually exploited her.
Justice Nagarathna then asked, "Why did she go and live with him before marriage?"
"She lived with him. She had a child from him. He walks out because there is no marriage bond. Legal bond is not there. He walks out, that is the risk in a live-in relationship. So once he walks out, it does not become a criminal offence," she said.
The woman's lawyer submitted that the accused was already married and had concealed this fact.
"See, if there was marriage, the question of her rights would have been better. She could have filed regarding bigamy. She could have filed for maintenance. She would have got those reliefs. Now since there is no marriage, they live together, this is the risk. They can walk out any day. What do we do?" Justice Nagarathna said.
She suggested that the woman could pursue remedies, such as maintenance for the child, and asked the parties to go for mediation.
"Even if he goes to jail, what will she gain? We can think of some maintenance for the child. Child is now seven years (old). At least, some monetary compensation can be made for the child," Justice Nagarathna said.
The apex court issued a notice in the matter and asked the parties to explore if a settlement could be reached between the petitioner and the accused.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Dalit outfits call state-wide hartal over dental student’s death
Thiruvananthapuram (PTI): Various Dalit organisations on Monday announced a state-wide hartal seeking justice in the death of Kannur Dental College student Nithin Raj.
The hartal will be observed on Tuesday from 6 am to 6 pm.
As many as 52 Dalit organisations, including Justice for Nithin Raj Action Council, have announced the strike.
Organisations requesting cooperation for the strike said that no vehicles will be forcibly stopped and that all essential services are exempted.
Raj, a first-year BDS student at a private dental college in Anjarakkandy in Kannur district, was found critically injured after falling from a building on April 10 and later succumbed to his injuries.
Police have registered a case against two faculty members on charges of abetment of suicide and under provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, following allegations by the student’s family that he was subjected to caste- and complexion-based harassment.
Kerala Pinnokka Samudaya Munnani (KPSM), one of the organisations supporting the hartal, alleged in a statement that police had shown apathy in the investigation and were attempting to protect the accused in the case.
KPSM state president K V Padmanabhan and general secretary S Anwar alleged that the probe into Raj’s death was being deliberately misdirected and delayed.
While the family has firmly alleged that caste discrimination and mental harassment by faculty members led to the student’s death, police were attempting to divert the investigation towards loan app borrowings, they claimed.
The organisation alleged that this was a planned move to shield the real accused.
KPSM further alleged that by deliberately delaying the arrest of the accused teachers, police enabled them to secure anticipatory bail.
They said there was no confidence in the present police investigation and demanded that the case be handed over to an independent agency at the earliest.
