Character of a Victim Cannot Be Weaponised to Imply Consent: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that the character of a victim, “no matter how blemished, cannot be weaponised against her to imply consent” in rape cases.

Justice Amit Mahajan stated that even a willing companion who accompanies a client in lieu of some consideration can still be a victim of rape.

Accused Sought Quashing of FIR Alleging Rape on Pretext of Marriage

The Court made the observations while hearing a plea filed by a rape accused seeking quashing of an FIR against him. The accused, a married man, was charged with rape and unnatural sex on the pretext of marriage.

The complainant had alleged that the accused sexually assaulted her after spiking her drink and later continued physical relations on a false promise of marriage, while also taking money from her.

It was alleged that the accused took around ₹8 lakhs from her, later demanded an additional ₹10 lakhs, and threatened to make her photos and videos viral if she failed to pay the said amount.

Accused Questioned the Woman’s Character

The accused cast aspersions on the woman’s character by referring to her alleged implication in a case under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, and previous cases instituted by her on similar allegations that ended in acquittal. It was his contention that she herself stated she had demanded money in exchange for giving him company.

Court: Willingness to Accompany Does Not Imply Consent

While quashing the case, Justice Mahajan observed that merely because the complainant was willing to accompany the accused for some money does not indicate that she was also willing to establish sexual relations with him. “This Court thus considers it apposite to desist from making any remarks against Respondent No. 2 in relation to her prior complaints as well as the other allegations made in the pleadings before this Court,” the order stated.

Court Notes Inconsistencies and Lack of Evidence

The Court further noted that the case was riddled with inconsistencies and lacked corroborative evidence. “This Court cannot be blind to the fact that with the passage of time, there has been an increasing tendency of weaponizing law to wreak vengeance after souring of relationships, which has a chilling effect on genuine survivors. False cases have the effect of tarnishing an individual's reputation in society and it is the duty of the Court to take into account attending circumstances as well as the material collected during investigation,” the Court said.

It added “The entire premise of the case which involves the parties entering into a relationship and entering into sexual relations on the false promise to marry only a few days after meeting appears to be doubtful given the lack of any cogent material to support the same. All the factors point toward the allegations being made with a motive to implicate the petitioner.”

 

Finding that the prosecution was not supported by credible evidence, the Court allowed the accused’s plea and quashed the FIR.

Case Title: Parag Prakash Rudrangi v. State & Anr.