Karnataka HC rebukes woman for alleging rape against man she dated for 6 years; man cleared of all charges

In a case shedding light on the misuse of laws, the Karnataka High Court has dismissed two criminal cases against a man from Bengaluru. The cases were brought by a woman who alleged rape on the pretext of marriage against the man with whom she was in a relationship for six years. The court emphasized that the accused and the complainant were engaged in a consensual physical and sexual relationship for a prolonged period and hence it cannot deemed sex The connection between them began on a social media platform and continued intimately for six years, culminating on December 27, 2019. The court underlined that the gradual decrease in intimacy over time does not transform consensual sex into rape. Justice M Nagaprasanna stated firmly that the acts had been consensual from the beginning until December 27, 2019. Consequently, the court quashed the proceedings related to the First Information Reports (FIRs) lodged against the accused in 2021, one at the Indiranagar police station in Bengaluru and the other at the women’s police station in Davanagere. Justice Nagaprasanna reasoned that given the extensive duration of the sexual relationship spanning six years, it cannot be construed as rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The court referred to several Supreme Court judgments, including the case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra. The petitioner initially connected with the complainant on Facebook in 2013. The woman alleged that he had lured her to his residence under the pretext of showcasing his culinary skills, as he lived nearby. Subsequently, she claimed that they engaged in intimate acts while consuming beer during her visits. The petitioner, who had promised marriage, ended the relationship after six years of physical intimacy. On March 8, 2021, the complainant filed a complaint with the Indiranagar police, alleging offenses like cheating and criminal intimidation. Following the accused’s release on bail, the complainant lodged a separate complaint in Davanagere, accusing him of assault and rape. Notably, another woman was implicated alongside the petitioner in this second complaint. Chargesheets were filed by the police in both instances. The petitioner and the co-accused woman contested the proceedings, asserting that the complainant had a history of befriending affluent individuals, extracting money from them, and leveraging false accusations for blackmail. Furthermore, the petitioner highlighted a previous case in which the complainant had similarly accused a man of breach of promise of marriage and rape. In that instance, the woman ultimately withdrew her statement, leading to the man’s acquittal in 2016.