SC On Whether Sexual Intercourse Would Be Considered Rape

OVERVIEW 

In the case of Vinay Pratap Singh v. State of UP, the Apex Court posed the question “Can sexual intercourse between man and woman be called rape?” while determining the charges against one Vinay Pratap Singh who was indulged in a romantic live-in relationship. He has been accused by his partner of obtaining consent for sexual intercourse by way of fraud and false promise of marrying her.

An FIR was registered against Vinay Pratap Singh when for some reason, he parted ways with his live-in-partner, the complainant, and went on to marry another woman.

The accused was charged under Sections 376 (Punishment for Rape), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) and 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. 

The Court granted the accused protection from arrest for four weeks but refused to comment on the fate of the FIR lodged against the accused, on whether it would be quashed.

BACKGROUND 

The case of Vinay Pratap Singh arose out of a live-in relationship for two years between two employees working in a call centre and they were in a consensual romantic relationship.

The complainant claimed that she had been of the opinion that she would like to indulge in sexual intercourse only after they had gotten married to each other.

On February, 2014 the couple had gone to Manali and had performed rituals of marriage in the Hidimba Temple situated in Manali.

The accused denied being a part of any such marriage as was claimed by the complainant’s advocate, Aditya Vashishtnath. 

The complainant claimed that the sexual activities she participated in were based on the pretext that their marriage in the Hidimba Temple was a ‘real marriage’ and if it wasn’t, then she could conclude that the consent for sexual intercourse had been obtained by ‘fraud’.

The woman filed the FIR in question after the accused had ended their relationship and had married another woman.

 
FURTHER DETAILS 

In the instant case which is being heard by the three judge division bench headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde and Justices A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian, the Court commented that “ Making a false promise of marriage is wrong. No one should falsely promise marriage and break off. But that is different from saying that the act of sexual intercourse is rape."

The complainant also accused him of brutally exploiting her and claimed, her fractured leg and several injuries and wounds in her private body parts, for which she had to visit the hospital, were inflicted on her by the accused. To this Advocate Vibha Datta Makhija, appearing as a representative of the accused, accused her this activity being a ‘habitual act’ that she had done earlier as well.

The Chief Justice of India commented that "Then you file a case for assault and marital cruelty. Why file a rape case?", who also questioned whether the abuse within a "relationship of marriage" could be considered rape.

The Apex Court further added that the Supreme court had "settled the matter" in earlier Judgments pertaining to similar questions on similar occasions.

 CONCLUSION

In 2019, an FIR was filed against one Vinay Pratap Singh accusing him of raping his live-in partner of two years since the consent for sexual intercourse was obtained by fraud according to the complainant.

On hearing the case, the Supreme Court granted interim protection from arrest to the accused for four weeks and commented “You apply for discharge from the case in the trial court after evidence is collected,” thereby refusing to comment on the status of the plea of the accused to quash the FIR.

Advocate on Record Pushkar Sharma, appearing for the petitioner had produced images and evidences of the then couple engaging in marital rituals in the Hidimba Temple which the accused denied in all respects.

Advocate Vibha Dutta Makhija commented that if consensual sexual intercourse in a live-in relationship could result in rape charges and accusations, leading to the arrest of the man, it would set a dangerous precedent.

The bench posed one final question pertaining to this matter, “Husband May be Brutal But Can Sexual Intercourse Between Man And Wife be Called Rape?”

WHAT IS YOUR OPINION REGARDING THE GRANT OF SUCH PROTECTION? WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE STANCE OF THE COURT IN POSING SUCH QUESTION? LET US KNOW IN THE COMMENTS BELOW!