AHMEDABAD: A local court has acquitted a married man of rape charges levelled against him after his breakup with his live-in partner, who resided with him for over a year even while her three marriages were in subsistence.
The city sessions court considered the history of the live-in relationship between the man and the woman. “Having a live-in relationship with the accused despite the knowledge that he was a married man shows that the victim was fully aware of the moral quality of the act,” the court said in its December 29, 2021, order. “…and was a willing and consenting partner.”
According to the case details, the accuser is a 30-year-old woman married thrice earlier and not divorced from any of her husbands. She came in touch with the man in question in 2016 and started living with him in 2017. After the relationship fell apart, she ingested insecticide and was hospitalized. She survived and lodged an FIR with Narol police in February 2018 accusing her partner of rape by giving her a false promise of marriage.
During the trial, it came on record that the woman had two marriages before this relationship and her third wedding took place in 2017 when she was in the relationship with the man. The court noted that she had not got a divorce in any of her marriages. She was involved in litigation with two husbands. The court was told that she was aware of her partner’s marital status and problems started when his wife and in-laws learned about the affair and detained him. The court also heard that she had a suicidal tendency and tried to kill herself in the past.
After the trial, additional sessions judge P K T Ram said her testimony was inconsistent and at variance with the complaint that she filed. In her statement to police, she alleged that sexual intercourse took place on the false promise of marriage. In her testimony in court she insisted that the relationship was forced, spurred by a false promise.
While acquitting the man, the court said: “This court is of the opinion that the sexual intercourse between the couple which was with the consent of the victim cannot be said to be a ‘rape’.” The court added: “The victim was 30 years of age and had adequate intelligence and maturity to understand the significance and morality associated with the act she was consenting to.”
