The Karnataka High Court recently quashed a rape case against a 23-year-old youth booked on a complaint by a woman who claimed that she had withdrawn her consent for sex during their encounter in a hotel room..Justice M Nagaprasanna passed the order after noting that the sexual relationship between him and the complainant- woman, whom he had met via dating app Bumble, was consensual.The single-judge took note of a submission made by the accused that the police had ignored the chats between him and the woman. “The chats are not in good taste nor can be reproduced in the course of the order. It would only indicate that the acts between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent/complainant are all consensual,” the single-judge said, while ruling in favour of the accused man on October 25. .The accused and the woman came in contact on dating app Bumble a year back and then remained connected through Instagram. In the police complaint dated August 13, the woman said they decided to meet in person on August 11 and after picking her from her apartment, they went to a hotel. She added that when he started seducing her, she instantly withdrew her consent for sexual intercourse. However, she alleged that the accused disregarded her expressed withdrawal of consent and proceeded to rape her. The next morning, he is said to have dropped her home. The complaint further said that she later suffered pain and went to a hospital. Subsequently, she filed a complaint, leading to registration of a criminal case under Section 64 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). .The counsel representing the accused submitted that there were only consensual acts between him and the complainant who has been active on Bumble for a long time. However, the State opposed the quashing of the case, submitting that the accused should prove his innocence in trial..Considering the nature of chats and law laid down by the Supreme Court, the single-judge proceeded to quash the rape case. “The Apex Court, in the afore-quoted judgments, has etched with clarity, the nuanced distinction between consensual intimacy and the grave allegation of rape. A relationship born of mutual volition, even if it founders in disappointment, cannot, save in clearest of cases, be transmuted into an offence under the criminal law. If the present prosecution were permitted to meander into a trial, it would be nothing but a ritualistic procession towards miscarriage of justice and indeed become an abuse of the process of the law,” the Court said..Advocate Athreya C Shekar represented the accused. Additional SPP BN Jagadesha represented the State..[Read Judgment]
