The Supreme Court has held that consensual sexual relations between adults in a mutually affectionate relationship cannot be retrospectively criminalised as rape merely because the relationship subsequently ends.

The observation came while a Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan discharged a man from charges in a rape case involving allegations of sexual relations on a false promise of marriage.

The Court flagged what it described as a “disturbing trend in recent years” of consensual relationships being retrospectively examined after their breakdown to identify circumstances that could be construed as sexual assault or violence.

The Bench drew a distinction between cases where consent is obtained through a “mirage of deceit and falsehood at the outset” and situations where a person regrets having consented to sexual relations because the relationship later comes to an end.

The latter, the Court said, cannot turn a consensual relationship into a criminal offence or justify setting the criminal justice system in motion in a manner that deprives the accused of liberty and reputation.

The Court observed that such an approach would deprive men of their agency by effectively binding them indefinitely to a relationship for fear of facing a rape accusation if they decide to walk away.

“Such an approach denudes the man of any agency entirely as the mere factor of being in a consensual relationship at one point would bind him to it entirely for fear of being accused of rape at a subsequent point of time. In such a scenario can it be said that the man has no right to withdraw from the relationship? Can the decision be termed as deceit or fraud? Clearly not,” the Bench observed.

The Court further held that physical intimacy during a functioning relationship cannot subsequently be characterised as rape merely because the relationship soured or ceased to exist.

It noted that it had repeatedly come across instances where failed relationships were converted into criminal proceedings.

“Rape being a heinous offence must be reserved for situations where there is real sexual violence, coercion or manipulation of consent,” the Court said.

It cautioned that converting every failed consensual relationship into a rape allegation dilutes the gravity of the offence and undermines the very nature of the criminal allegation.

At the same time, the Bench emphasised that rape strikes at the core of a woman's bodily autonomy and dignity. It acknowledged that the offence remains significantly under-reported, with victims often choosing silence to protect their own and their families' honour and reputation.

The Court clarified that genuine cases involving sexual assault and violence must be pursued rigorously. However, the criminal justice system should not be misused to harass someone merely for choosing to end a consensual relationship.