Date: July 19, 2023

Orissa, India

Orissa High Court acquitted a man accused of rape on his sister-in-law, stating that the alleged victim's failure to offer resistance indicated consent. The judgment was delivered by the Single Judge Bench of Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo in the case titled "Sanu Munda v. State of Odisha" (Case No: JCRLA No. 20 of 2021).

According to the victim's FIR, the incident took place during the evening hours of March 16, 2014, while she was returning home through a jungle. She claimed that the appellant forcibly engaged in sexual intercourse with her. However, the defense presented evidence challenging her version of events.

The Court's observations revealed critical factors that led to the acquittal. The medical examination conducted a day after the incident did not show any bodily injury or signs of recent sexual intercourse. The victim stated that her blouse was torn and bangles were broken during the alleged rape, but the seizure list of her wearing apparels did not corroborate this claim.

Additionally, the spot visit report did not provide any incriminating evidence. Moreover, the medical examination reports showed that the blood groups of the victim and the appellant were different, and human semen of a different blood group was found on the victim's clothing.

Taking these factors into account, the Court concluded that the victim did not protest or resist the appellant's advances and that the alleged sexual intercourse happened with her consent. The judgment stated that, as a married lady accustomed to sexual intercourse, if the act had occurred without her consent, she would have likely protested or resisted, resulting in visible injuries.

The Court further opined that the victim, having been caught in a compromising position by her husband, falsely accused the appellant to "save her own skin."

The counsel for the appellant, Mr. Chandan Samantaray, argued that the evidence presented before the Court clearly demonstrated that the sexual act was consensual and not forced.

With these findings, the High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court.

The ruling has sparked discussions about the interpretation of consent and resistance in cases of sexual assault. Legal experts and women's rights activists are closely examining the judgment's implications on future rape cases and the importance of understanding the complexities surrounding consent.

The case highlights the necessity of a comprehensive and sensitive approach to handling sexual assault cases, ensuring that justice is served while protecting the rights of all parties involved.

The State has the option to appeal the High Court's decision in a higher court, seeking further review of the case and its implications on the interpretation of consent in cases of alleged sexual assault.