Relationship end not reason to allege rape: Kerala High Court warns of law misuse
On examining the woman's statements, the court found that she had voluntarily travelled from Thiruvananthapuram to Kozhikode and stayed with the petitioner in different lodges for two nights. It also noted that she had maintained regular contact with him on Instagram and Snapchat.The High Court concluded that there was no prima facie case of rape. 'It cannot be assumed that the physical relationship was without her consent. Merely because a consensual relationship turned sour at a later point of time, it cannot be a reason to allege rape,' said Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas. '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.'advertisementJustice Thomas added that arrest and remand should not become tools of punishment when a romantic relationship turns 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,' the judge added, while granting bail.The High Court underlined that legal protection must be preserved against false or exaggerated charges:'When a married lady, on her own volition travelled...and willingly stayed with the petitioner in different lodges... it cannot be assumed that the physical relationship between them was without her consent.'Finding no need for custodial interrogation, the Court granted anticipatory bail with conditions: the petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer, refrain from contacting the complainant, and avoid tampering with evidence.- Ends
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
43 minutes ago
- India Today
Bengal's Aparajita Woman and Child Bill explained
The recent rape of a student in a Kolkata government law college has reignited discussions about Bengal's Aparjita Woman and Child Bill, introduced in 2024. This legislation, aimed at strengthening protection for women and children, proposes stricter penalties for sexual offences compared to the central Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) of 2023. The Aparjita Bill mandates life imprisonment or death penalty for rape, while the BNS prescribes a minimum 10-year sentence. For gang rape, the Bengal bill directly proposes life imprisonment or death, versus the BNS's 20-year minimum. Despite passing in the Bengal assembly, the Aparjita Bill awaits presidential assent, a process complicated by political rivalries. Similar bills in Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra, also proposing death penalties for rape, remain pending presidential approval.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
3 who conned lawyer of Rs 3 crore in ‘digital arrest' fraud nabbed
Noida: Three men have been arrested in connection with a cyber fraud of Rs 3.2 crore after a woman was put under digital arrest last month. The scammers had made the woman — a lawyer — believe she was implicated in serious crimes such as gambling, blackmail and illegal purchase of weapons. The trio has been identified as Dupender Singh, Vinay Samaniya and Mandeep Singh. Additional deputy commissioner of police (cyber) Manisha Singh said on Friday while Dupender and Vinay were nabbed from Delhi, Mandeep was apprehended from Noida. "We are trying to crack down on the trail. Rs 17 lakh has been frozen so far," Singh said. During interrogation, Dupender alias Ginni, who has an apparel business in Delhi, said he gave the access of his bank account for the money transfer co-accused Vinay. He used to receive 15% of the amount. Thus Rs 93 lakh was transferred to his bank account." You Can Also Check: Noida AQI | Weather in Noida | Bank Holidays in Noida | Public Holidays in Noida Vinay told police he shared Dupinder's bank account with other associates on a 25% commission. "Mandeep said he took Rs 50,000 from one of his accomplices to get the fraud amount transferred to his bank account and gave the access of his bank account to him. Rs 71 lakh related to the case was transferred to the account of Mandeep," the ADCP said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 2025 Top Trending local enterprise accounting software [Click Here] Esseps Learn More Undo The woman had filed the complaint with the cyber police station on June 30. On June 10, she received a call on her landline. The caller introduced himself as an employee of an investigation agency and informed the woman that her Aadhaar card and bank account were used in illegal smuggling of weapons, blackmailing and gambling. He also told the woman she might have to go to jail as the matter was serious. When she called the phone number provided by the scammers for a NoC, they repeated the accusations. The fraudsters called her repeatedly until June 24 on WhatsApp. The video call appeared to be from a person in a police uniform, with the background resembling a real police station. During these "interrogations," the woman's bank account details were was asked to break her FD and in five RTGS transactions, she transferred Rs 3.2 crore to the scammers. They also promised that after investigation, the entire amount would be returned to the original account. Based on the statements, police had filed a case under sections 308(2) (extortion), 318(4) (cheating), and 319(2) (cheating by personation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and section 66D of the IT Act.
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
High Court refuses to cancel Rs 215-crore ED case against Jacqueline Fernandez
The Delhi High Court has refused to cancel a Rs 215-crore money laundering case against actor Jacqueline Fernandez, saying the stage of the proceedings did not warrant such a move. The court emphasised that the trial process must unfold to determine whether the accused committed the case dates back to August 17, 2022, when the ED filed a chargesheet naming Fernandez as an accused in the case linked to conman Sukesh actor allegedly received jewellery worth over Rs 7 crore by Chandrashekhar. He had also allegedly gifted several high-end cars, expensive bags, clothes, shoes and costly watches to the actor and her family members. In its order, the High Court reiterated that it was only through a full trial that the prosecution was required to prove that the accused had committed the alleged offence. "At the stage of framing of charges, probative value of the material cannot be gone into and the material brought by the prosecution has to be accepted," the court observed. It added that "Whether, in fact, the accused committed the offence, can only be decided in the trial."Fernandez had sought to cancel the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) filed by the ED against her. However, the court deemed her plea premature, especially when arguments on charges were still pending before the trial court and charges were yet to be court ruled her application to cancel the complaint, effectively asking the judiciary to conduct a "pre-trial" based solely on material on record, which it declined to do."The petitioner's case itself relies upon the statements of witnesses, and if these statements are complete, watertight, non-porous, not capable of eliciting further evidence, are clearly not conclusions that the court can reach in these proceedings," it High Court also noted that Fernandez's contentions - that she was conned, misled or hoodwinked - were subjective and remained unestablished. 'All aspects pleaded by her are subjective issues which require to be established through trial," the court noted, adding that, "conclusivity can only precipitate during the trial which is the filtration mechanism offered by the criminal justice process."While the court clarified that it was not passing any conclusive observations on the allegations, it stated that certain issues raised by the ED concerning Fernandez's conduct informed its decision not to cancel the the points raised by the ED were:A 2020 news article, shared with Fernandez by her makeup artist Shaan Muttathil, concerning a Look-Out Notice against actor Leena Maria Paul, who was linked to impersonation and extortion in a bank fraud case. The ED argued that this should have alerted Fernandez to the criminal background of ED claimed Fernandez failed to verify claims made by Chandrasekhar while searching about him also submitted that Fernandez admitted to deleting data from her mobile phone after learning of Chandrasekhar's agency alleged that she initially concealed details of her financial transactions with Chandrasekhar and only disclosed them when confronted with the court made no determination on the truth of these allegations, it concluded that these circumstances do not justify the cancellation of the case at this case will now proceed in the trial court where arguments on the framing of charges are ongoing.- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Delhi
