Intimate Relationship No Proof Of Consent If Woman Was Deceived Or Blackmailed: Madras High Court
· Free Press Journal
An intimate relationship between a man and a woman does not prove consent to sexual acts if the woman’s participation was secured through deception, coercion, intimidation or blackmail, the Madras High Court has held.
Visit tr-sport.bond for more information.
A Bench of Justices N Anand Venkatesh and K Ramakrishnan made the observation while upholding the conviction and life sentence of Susi alias Kasi for repeatedly raping and blackmailing a woman after making false promises of employment and marriage. The Court upheld his imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life, Live Law and Bar & Bench report.
Consent must be freely given
“The mere fact that the victim was subjected to repeated physical intimacy with the accused does not, by itself, establish that the relationship was consensual. The surrounding circumstances in which the acts occurred, the absence of free and informed choice, and the existence of coercion, deception, or intimidation must all be carefully evaluated before concluding that there was valid consent in the eye of law,” the Court said.
The Bench said passive submission or non-resistance under threats or coercive circumstances could not be treated as voluntary consent. Courts must examine how the relationship began, the intentions of the accused and whether the relationship was based on genuine affection or calculated deception.
The judgment is an important reminder that consent cannot be inferred merely because a woman continued to meet a man or did not physically resist him. Fear, emotional manipulation and threats can take away a person’s ability to make a free choice.
“Our constitutional and legal framework unequivocally recognises every individual’s bodily autonomy and sexual autonomy. Any physical relationship must be founded upon the free, voluntary, informed and unequivocal consent of the person concerned. A physical act performed without such consent attracts the penal consequences contemplated under the criminal law,” the Court observed.
Job and marriage promises used as bait
According to the prosecution, the woman was looking for employment when Kasi contacted her through Facebook. She initially rejected his friend requests but later accepted one after persuasion.
Kasi allegedly gained her trust by promising to secure employment for her and marry her. He later moved their conversations to WhatsApp and persuaded her to meet him.
During their first meeting, he took her to his father’s factory premises, locked the car and sexually assaulted her despite her resistance. He later apologised, renewed his promises of employment and marriage and persuaded her to meet him again.
The prosecution said Kasi recorded intimate photographs and videos without her knowledge. When she refused to meet him, he threatened to circulate the material on social media and share it with her family, friends and colleagues. The threats allegedly compelled her to submit to further sexual acts.
She lodged a complaint after learning that the police had seized the electronic material in another case against Kasi. His laptop allegedly contained around 355 nude and semi-nude videos and more than 1,000 obscene photographs depicting hundreds of women.
The case was transferred to the Crime Branch-Criminal Investigation Department. After the trial, the Fast Track Mahila Court in Nagercoil convicted Kasi under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66E of the Information Technology Act.
‘Classic illustration’ of romance fraud
Kasi argued before the High Court that the relationship was consensual and that the woman had allowed him to record the photographs and videos. He also claimed that the relationship later failed because of caste differences.
The Court rejected his arguments, finding that his promises of employment and marriage were not genuine and had been used to gain control over the woman.
The Bench described the case as a “classic illustration” of romance fraud, rape by deception and sexual extortion. It said such cases required courts to assess evidence from the victim’s perspective instead of relying on stereotypes about how a victim should behave.
The ruling rightly places the focus on the conditions in which consent was supposedly given. A relationship built on lies, followed by threats involving intimate material, cannot be treated as a normal romantic relationship that later went wrong.
The Court also said every criminal case must be decided solely on legally produced evidence. Public sentiment, media attention, the seriousness of the allegations or other cases against the accused could not determine guilt.
“A Court of law cannot permit itself to be influenced by public sentiment, glare, or the gravity of the allegations,” it said.
The Court rejected arguments based on omissions in the first information report, observing that a complaint was not expected to contain a complete account of every incident, particularly when it was made by a traumatised victim who had remained under continuous threat.
It also dismissed Kasi’s allegation that the investigating agency had pressured the woman into lodging the complaint. Describing him as a habitual sexual predator, the Court held that there were no mitigating circumstances that justified reducing his sentence.
Court warns against sharing intimate images
The Bench also appealed to young people to exercise caution while entering relationships based on online communication.
It said the rapid growth of digital communication and social media had created opportunities for exploitation through deception, emotional manipulation, coercion, non-consensual recording of intimate images and threats to circulate them.
“Awareness, vigilance and timely reporting of such offences are indispensable to prevent victimisation,” the Court observed.
The judgment included an advisory urging young girls and women to exercise utmost caution and protect their privacy and dignity in the digital world.
“Regrettably, in the present digital era, some unscrupulous individuals exploit the trust and emotional vulnerability of young girls and women... this Court considers it appropriate to make a humble but earnest appeal to all young girls and women. No matter how deep the affection, trust, or promise of confidentiality may appear, intimate photographs or videos should never be shared with anyone through electronic means,” the advisory said.
The Court issued the advisory in English, Tamil and Hindi and asked print, electronic and digital media organisations to publicise it to raise awareness about technology-enabled sexual exploitation.
Digital evidence takes a human toll
In a concurring postscript, Justice Venkatesh highlighted the vicarious trauma suffered by investigators, lawyers and judges who are required to repeatedly examine graphic digital evidence.
Over 1,000 Apply For First CEO Post Of Ram Janmabhoomi Trust; Retired IAS, IPS Officers Lead Race“The machinery of justice cannot treat its human beings like unfeeling computers. If we continue to ignore the mental and neurological toll of this digital age, we will end up with burnt-out, traumatised, and emotionally numbed investigators, lawyers, and judges,” he said.
The observation draws attention to an often-overlooked part of sexual crime investigations. Those examining disturbing evidence may not be direct victims of the crime, but repeated exposure can still affect their mental well-being and their ability to work.
The Court called for psychological screening, regular counselling, decompression protocols, rotation of personnel handling graphic material and training to recognise vicarious trauma.
“The law must continue to refine the technical rules for digital evidence. It must also, with equal seriousness, safeguard the minds entrusted to apply it,” Justice Venkatesh added.