KERALA| 3rd JULY 2025– The Kerala High Court recently granted anticipatory bail to a 27-year-old man accused of rape, after observing that the complainant’s statement revealed a prima facie consensual relationship between the parties involved. The case is titled [XXXXX v State of Kerala & anr].
COURT OBSERVATIONS ON CONSENT AND ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, while granting bail, emphasized the importance of judicial caution when dealing with allegations of rape arising from romantic relationships that later turn sour.
“Courts must be cautious when two young people enter into a willing physical relationship and later rape is attributed to their union. Refusing bail blindly in such cases, without considering the circumstances, can lead to injustice and destroy the young personality. Arrest and remand being a curtailment of the cherished liberty of a person, it must be resorted to only if the circumstances warrant such a course to be adopted,” the judge said.
The Court further held that invoking criminal law under the charge of rape in such cases was unwarranted.
“Merely because a consensual relationship turned sour at a later point of time, it cannot be a reason to allege rape. Further, there cannot be a case of deceitfully obtaining consent under a false promise of marriage as the de facto complainant is still in a subsisting marriage. Since prima facie I am satisfied that the statement given by the de facto complainant does not indicate an instance of rape stricto senso, petitioner ought to be protected with an order of pre-arrest bail,” the Court stated.
CASE BACKGROUND
The petitioner was booked under Section 64(1) (punishment for rape) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for allegedly raping a married woman, who is a third-year medical student, in a hotel near Thamarassery on November 3 and 4, 2024.
The complaint was filed five months after the alleged incident. The woman accused the petitioner of having non-consensual sexual intercourse with her during their stay.
ARGUMENTS AND COURT FINDINGS
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the allegations were fabricated and arose from a consensual relationship that deteriorated over time. Upon reviewing the First Information Statement (FIS) and the FIR, the Court noted that the woman:
Travelled voluntarily from Thiruvananthapuram to Kozhikode.
Stayed with the petitioner willingly in multiple lodges for two nights.
Remained in contact with him through Instagram and Snapchat.
The Court further pointed out that there could not be a case of deception by a false promise of marriage since she was already legally married at the time.
“When a married lady, on her own volition travelled all the way from Thiruvananthapuram to Kozhikode and willingly stayed with the petitioner in different lodges, that too for two nights, it cannot be assumed that the physical relationship between them was without her consent,” the Court observed.
CONDITIONS OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL
Considering the prosecution’s failure to demonstrate the necessity for custodial interrogation, the Court granted anticipatory bail with strict conditions:
The petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer for limited custodial interrogation.
He must not contact the complainant or tamper with evidence.
Representation
For the petitioner: Advocates P Abdul Nishad, Najma Thabsheera T, KC Mohamed Rashid, and Ajisha MS.
For the State: Public Prosecutor Sreeja V.
