NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said a relationship entered into by a man and a woman may be consensual at the beginning but it may not remain so for all time to come.
A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kunar the relationship at the beginning could be cordial and rosy but may turn sour subsequently while dismissing a petition filed by Rajkumar against the Karnataka High Court's order of March 30, 2023 which refused his plea to quash the FIR registered against him on July 23, 2022.
In the case, the bench noted there are various allegations and cross allegations against each other.
"The allegations do not demonstrate continued consent on the part of the complainant. A relationship may be consensual at the beginning but the same state may not remain so for all time to come. Whenever one of the partners show their unwillingness to continue with such relationship, the character of such relationship as it was when started will not continue to prevail," the bench said.
In its order on March 5, the court took into consideration the fact that the woman filed the complaint alleging commission of offences against her under the provisions of Sections 342, 354, 366, 376(2)(n), 312, 201, 420, 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 66(E), 67 and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
The bench said various alleged offending acts alleged to have been committed by the petitioner who claimed these were all a counterblast to his complaint of blackmailing/extortion against the woman.
"In the factual back drop, it cannot be held that the FIR does not disclose any offence. The allegations cannot be held to be inherently improbable, which is one of the grounds for quashing an FIR," the bench said.
The petitioner contended that consensual relationship cannot give rise to an offence of rape.
The court, however, said allegations do not demonstrate continued consent on the part of the complainant.
"A relationship may be consensual at the beginning but the same state may not remain so for all time to come," the bench said.
"In the instant case, we do not think the relationship had remained consensual to justify quashing of the criminal complaint at the threshold. We also do not think that the complaint, in pursuance of which the FIR has been registered, lacks the ingredients of the offences alleged," the bench added.
