Thane: A court in Maharashtra's Thane district has acquitted a 35-year-old man accused of raping and intimidating a woman on the pretext of marriage, ruling that their relationship was consensual. Additional Sessions Judge G T Pawar issued the order, citing a Supreme Court precedent establishing that a consensual relationship sustained over a prolonged period does not constitute rape under a false promise of marriage.
The prosecution case stemmed from a complaint filed by a woman who is a widow with a daughter. According to her allegations, she connected with the accused via Instagram, and he subsequently sexually assaulted her at a residence in Mumbra within the Thane district on November 12, 2022, after making promises of marriage and offering to care for her child.
Further allegations from the prosecution stated that the man repeatedly exploited her, took loans of money and gold ornaments for his business operations, and later resorted to assault and threats when she demanded they follow through on marriage. She also claimed he threatened to release private photographs of her publicly.
Conversely, the defence maintained that the involvement between the two was entirely consensual and that the charges brought against the accused were false. Upon reviewing testimonies from both sides, Judge Pawar highlighted a discrepancy where the woman claimed her initial encounter was forced during her court testimony, yet told the medical officer during her examination that the interaction was consensual.
The court observed that if the first incident had indeed occurred without her consent and against her will, an immediate complaint would have been expected, which did not happen. The court concluded from the available evidence that the sexual encounters between the two parties were consensual in nature.
Additional remarks from the bench noted that the complainant, an adult woman who was previously married and had a daughter, accompanied the man to an undisclosed location and spent the night there. The court pointed out that the promise of marriage was mentioned only after the initial sexual encounter occurred, meaning it could not legally be classified as a false promise of marriage made to induce consent.
Drawing upon the Supreme Court framework regarding long-term consensual engagements, the sessions court determined that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in a full acquittal on all counts. Throughout the legal proceedings, the prosecution presented testimonies from four witnesses, including the complainant, a panch witness, the medical officer, and the lead investigating officer.