The Delhi High Court held that relationships between consenting adults, even if one partner is married, should not be judged through an outdated perspective.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma stated that if two adults choose to live together or have a sexual relationship, they must accept responsibility for their decision. However, judges cannot impose their personal moral views on such matters. The court also noted that educated adults today perceive relationships in ways that were not considered acceptable in the past.
The Court emphasized that the justice system should approach such matters without being judgmental, while acknowledging the responsibilities that arise from adult choices.
It observed that if an educated woman knowingly enters into a relationship with a married man, she must also accept the consequences of that decision.
The Court added that she should be aware of the possibility that the relationship may not lead to marriage or may eventually fail, noting that the law cannot always be used as a remedy for a consensual relationship that does not succeed.
“When a woman voluntarily enters into such a relationship, she must also accept the repercussions that may arise from it,” the Court said.
Justice Sharma observed that the law cannot remain static and must evolve in step with the changing norms of society, advancing as communities progress.
“It cannot lag behind or apply an outdated intent to a society that has already moved forward. While cases relating to commercial or contractual disputes are necessarily decided on settled legal principles which remain relevant, cases involving human relationships stand slightly on a different footing. They must be seen in the light of the way human relations themselves have changed, and they cannot be approached with a rigid or outdated lens. Judges, too, are part of this changing society, and the justice system cannot remain detached from these realities,” the Court said.
Justice Sharma made these remarks while quashing a 2020 rape case against a man, a pilot by profession. The complainant, a cabin crew member, alleged that she first met him on a flight, after which he contacted her via WhatsApp using her number from the company directory. She claimed that during a meeting at a hotel, he drugged her and raped her.
She further alleged that he continued to have sexual relations with her on the false promise of marriage and by misusing her private photos and videos.
She claimed that she was forced to undergo multiple abortions during the course of the relationship.
While allowing the plea to quash the FIR, the Court observed that the prosecutrix became aware immediately after their first sexual encounter in the hotel that the accused was already married and could not marry her.
Nevertheless, she chose to continue the relationship with him for over two years, during which they maintained regular physical and intimate relations.
“Notwithstanding this knowledge, she continued to voluntarily maintain physical relations with the petitioner until August 2020, when the relationship finally broke down, leading to the registration of the present FIR in September 2020,” the Court said.
The Court further noted that the conversations prior to the incident showed mutual intimacy, indicating that the relationship was voluntary and consensual from the beginning.