The bench of Justice B.S.Chauhan and Justice Dipak Misra gave its judgment in the Supreme Court yesterday that a case in which a man keeps a physical relationship with a woman who is a major attaining the age of 18, with her consent cannot be called a rape in the first case.
Secondly, the bench also observed that the male refusing to marry her cannot make it rape. It cannot be called as a breach of agreement either when the intensions of the man are not mala fide.
If the male indulging in an intimate relationship with a woman and not able to marry her later, he cannot be called guilty.
The Apex court observes that there is a difference between a breach of a promise and failure to keep up the promise. If a promise is made in good faith and if it is not fulfilled as the situation arose that was not expected at the time of making such promise does not make the male guilty for not marrying her. If a false promise is made and not fulfilled, it should be legally treated differently.
What matters is whether the woman agreed for the physical relationship because of her love or solely because of the promise made to marry her.
Even if the woman consents for the sexual indulgence because of the promise made to marry her, it has to be seen whether the promise made was genuine or with mala fide intensions.
AW-SriJa
