The Allahabad High Court, while acquitting a man accused of rape under the pretext of marriage, emphasized the importance of a balanced approach in sexual offence laws.

While acknowledging the rightful focus on protecting women, the court highlighted that the innocence or guilt of the male partner should not be automatically assumed solely based on gender considerations.

In their ruling, Justices Rahul Chaturvedi and Nand Prabha Shukla of the division bench emphasized that in such cases, the burden of proof rests with both the complainant and the accused.

"No doubt, chapter XVI (on) 'sexual offences' is a women-centric enactment to protect the dignity and honour of a lady and girl and rightly so, but while assessing the circumstances, it is not the only and every time the male partner is at wrong, the burden is upon both of them," the court observed.

The court was considering the complainant's appeal challenging the acquittal of the accused in a rape case. Additionally, the accused had been charge-sheeted under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

In 2019, the woman filed a police complaint in Prayagraj, alleging that the accused engaged in a sexual relationship with her under the promise of marriage, but subsequently reneged on his commitment. She further asserted that he had made derogatory remarks about her caste. Following investigation, the accused was formally charged in 2020.

After the trial court in Prayagraj acquitted the accused of the rape charge and convicted him solely under Section 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) on February 8, 2024, the complainant subsequently appealed to the high court.

In his defense before the court, the accused asserted that the relationship in question was consensual. He stated that he decided against marrying the woman upon discovering that she did not belong to the 'Yadav' caste as she had previously claimed.

Considering the facts, the court noted that the complainant had married a man in 2010 but had started living separately from him after two years. Furthermore, the court observed that the complainant had concealed the fact of her previous marriage from the proceedings.

Upholding the acquittal given by the trial court, the high court said, "It can be easily inferred that a lady who is already married and without dissolution of her earlier marriage and concealing her caste has maintained the physical relationship for good five years without any objection and hesitation."

"Both of them have visited a number of hotels and lodges in Allahabad and Lucknow and enjoyed the company of each other. It is difficult to adjudicate who is befooling whom," it said.

In this context, the court observed that the complainant was unable to substantiate her claim regarding her caste. Considering this inconsistency, the court concluded that the trial court had correctly acquitted the accused. The court reasoned that the allegations of sexual harassment and rape made by the complainant could not be substantiated or accepted in light of these discrepancies.