The recent Supreme Court judgment dismissing a rape case against a man accused of sexually assaulting a woman, with whom he had a 16-year-old consensual sexual relationship under the false pretext of marriage, has sparked significant debate and raised questions around consent, coercion, and the legal interpretation of such cases. The ruling has garnered attention not just for its legal implications but also for the broader societal discourse it ignites about the complexities of relationships, consent, and the legal framework surrounding such sensitive issues. In this article, we will explore the details of this case, its impact on the legal system, and the varying perspectives on justice, morality, and the definition of consent in today’s society.
The Supreme Court has given its judgment on Rajnish Singh @ Soni VS State of UP on 3rd March 2025. The appellant Pooja Sharma, who is working as a lecturer in AFS Bhemora College, Lucknow, has filed a case against Rajnish Singh for sneaking into her house and subjecting her to a forcible sexual relationship. In her report, she also stated that she was not able to scream or call out for help as the accused had gagged her mouth.
Further in the statement, she also disclosed that she was warned not to disclose the incident to her family members, and he also requested her to remain silent and gave assurance of marriage. The case was filed under sections 384, 376, 323, 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
2006: Woman Alleges rape but remains silent as accused promises to marry her.
2009: She claims that she is intoxicated and videographed.
2022: She files an FIR after the accused marries another woman.
In the hearing, the court said, “The woman, despite being well educated, remained in a consensual 16-year relationship without filing any complaint. Additionally, the court has said that there was no proper evidence of ill intentions from the accused or any false promises of marriage.
Following this, the Supreme Court has asked only the clear-cut question, “Why was the report made only after the woman learned the accused was married to someone else?”
Also Read: Best Study Apps for Students: Boost productivity and Organization!
According to section 69 of the BNS, it penalizes individuals who engage in sexual relations under a false promise of marriage, especially without intent to fulfill it. It also covers deceitful actions like false job offers or identity concealment, with imprisonment up to 10 years.
In the Supreme court judgement, it is stated that “The complainant’s allegations seem to be a well-orchestrated story and nothing beyond that.”
Do you think the court made the right conclusion in this instance, or do you think otherwise?
Share
Hyderabad: 'Naa Tour', A Musical Evening with MM Keeravani!
Netflix vs Prime vs JioHotstar: Who Offers the Best Deals?
