The Delhi High Court observed that consensual relationships between adults, even where one partner is married, should not be judged through outdated moral frameworks.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma noted that when two adults choose to live together or engage in a sexual relationship, they alone must bear the consequences of their decision, and judicial officers cannot let personal moral views dictate such matters. The Court further underlined that in today’s era, educated individuals perceive relationships in ways that differ significantly from traditional notions.
The judgment also stressed that the justice system must approach such cases with impartiality and without moral prejudice, while at the same time acknowledging the responsibilities that naturally arise from the choices made by adults.
The Court remarked that when an educated woman voluntarily engages in a relationship with a married man, she must be conscious of and accept the potential consequences of her decision.
It further observed that she should acknowledge the likelihood that such a relationship may neither lead to marriage nor necessarily last, stressing that the law cannot always be invoked as a remedy for a consensual relationship that fails to sustain.
“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 changing social norms, advancing alongside the growth of society.
“It cannot lag behind or apply an outdated intent to a society that has already moved forward.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be seen in the light of the way human relations themselves have changed, and they cannot be approached with a rigid or outdated lens.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 rape case registered in 2020 against a man working as a pilot. The complainant, who was employed as cabin crew, alleged that their first meeting occurred on a flight, after which the accused reached out to her via WhatsApp using her contact details from the company directory.
She claimed that during a meeting at a hotel, he drugged her and committed rape.
She further alleged that the accused continued to have sexual relations with her under the false promise of marriage and by exploiting her private photographs and videos. She also asserted that, during the course of the relationship, she was compelled to undergo multiple abortions.
While allowing the plea to quash the FIR, the Court observed that the prosecutrix learned immediately after their first sexual encounter at the hotel that the accused was already married and therefore could not marry her.
Despite this, she continued the relationship 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 prior conversations between the parties demonstrated mutual intimacy, indicating that the relationship was consensual and voluntary from the beginning.