The Supreme Court on Monday asked a woman who has accused her former live-in partner of sexually assaulting her on the pretext of marriage, asking where the question of crime arises when the relationship is based on mutual consent or will.
She also has a child with him and then you are accusing her of sexual harassment?
This woman had challenged the order of Madhya Pradesh High Court, in which the FIR against her former live-in partner was cancelled.
The bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuiyan was hearing the woman’s appeal. During this, Justice Nagarathna said, “They lived together for 15 years.” Then the marriage did not take place and now she is saying that sexual harassment took place?
The woman’s lawyer told the court that her husband had already died and it was her brother-in-law who had introduced her to the accused. The accused had promised marriage and sexually exploited her.
Why did she go to live with him before marriage – Court
On this, Justice Nagarathna asked, “Why did she go to live with him before marriage?” She stayed with him. He also has a child from her. He breaks the relationship and goes away, because there is no bond of marriage between them. There is no legal obligation. This is the risk in live-in relationships. When he breaks the relationship and goes away, it does not become a crime.
Had the marriage taken place, the case for her rights would have been stronger – Court
The woman’s lawyer argued that the accused was married and had hidden this fact. Justice Nagarathna said, “Had the marriage taken place, the case for her rights would have been stronger.” She could have filed a case for bigamy and maintenance. He would have got those reliefs. But when the marriage has not taken place, they can break the relationship any day. What can we do about it?
He also said, “Even if he goes to jail, what will the woman gain from this?” We can think about some maintenance for the child. The child is now seven years old. At least some compensation can be arranged for the child.
The Supreme Court issued a notice and asked the parties to explore whether a settlement could be reached between the petitioner and the accused.