The Supreme Court has made it clear that the criminal justice system cannot become a tool for judging the personal choices of consenting adults, observing that even decisions which lead to painful or undesirable consequences do not automatically amount to criminal offences.
A Bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice R Mahadevan made the observations while quashing criminal proceedings against a man accused of rape on the false promise of marriage, cheating and bigamy. The allegations arose from a relationship in which the woman claimed that the man had concealed his existing marriage and presented himself as unmarried before marrying her.
Emphasising the importance of individual autonomy, the Court said adults are free to make decisions about their personal relationships, whether those decisions turn out to be sensible or reckless. The consequences of such choices, however unpleasant, cannot by themselves invite criminal prosecution.
The Bench cautioned against using criminal law as a means of settling personal disputes, seeking revenge or pressuring someone into acting in a particular manner.
The Court noted that the woman discovered within six months of the relationship that the man was already married and had children. Despite learning this, she continued living with him for approximately seven years.
According to the Bench, this circumstance weakened her assertion that she had continued the relationship under the genuine belief that she was his legally wedded wife.
After examining the circumstances, the Court found that the relationship and the physical intimacy were consensual. The man’s subsequent decision to walk away from the relationship, by itself, could not establish an offence of rape under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code.
Supreme Court flags growing misuse of criminal proceedings
The Bench also expressed concern over what it described as an increasing tendency to convert failed consensual relationships into criminal cases.
It observed that such disputes frequently end in settlements involving substantial monetary payments by the male accused, raising concerns about the use of criminal proceedings to exert pressure in personal conflicts.
The Court said the trend was particularly troubling despite repeated judicial warnings against turning relationship disputes into criminal litigation.
Court recognises situations where consent may be vitiated
At the same time, the Supreme Court was careful not to dilute the seriousness of genuine allegations of rape and sexual assault.
It acknowledged that sexual violence remains significantly underreported and that cases supported by evidence of assault must be pursued with seriousness.
The Bench also recognised the social and cultural significance of marriage in India, noting that a woman may agree to physical intimacy because she genuinely believes the relationship is based on an existing or promised legally recognised marriage.
In such circumstances, marriage may form the very foundation of her decision to enter into a sexual relationship, making her consent dependent on the assurance that the relationship has the legal and social legitimacy represented by her partner.
The Court explained that if a woman is genuinely kept unaware of her partner’s existing marriage, the deception could potentially invalidate her consent. In such cases, the protective provisions of the IPC, including Sections 376, 493, 494 and 495, must remain available.
However, the Bench stressed that determining whether consent was obtained through deception requires a careful examination of the facts and evidence in each individual case. Criminal liability cannot be founded merely on allegations or moral assumptions.
The ruling draws a distinction between genuine sexual offences involving deception and relationships that simply collapse after adults make consensual personal choices.