Goa Sessions Court Dismisses Rape Allegation Against Married Man

A Sessions Court in Goa has dismissed a rape allegation against a married man, citing Indian law does not recognize marital rape. The case pertains to a woman alleging that her husband had forcible sexual intercourse with her before their civil marriage took place on August 7, 2024.

In an order on Thursday, Pooja C Kavlekar, Presiding Officer, Fast Track Special Court, (POCSO) Panaji, stated: ‘The complaint has been filed after the marriage is solemnised. The allegation that the accused during the subsistence of civil marriage had sex with the victim without her consent does not stand as Indian law does not recognize marital rape,’

The prosecution contended that between July 13 and August 6, the accused had forcible sexual intercourse with the complainant without her consent on several occasions and also threatened her with dire consequences. The prosecution submitted that in her statement, the victim stated that she and the accused are ‘civilly married’ and that the accused is refusing to marry her and has filed an application to cancel the marriage that was filed.

Key Analysis and Detailed Timeline

The court agreed with the submission that the chargesheet is filed under Section 64 of BNS, which pertains to rape and not Section 69, which relates to sexual intercourse. The court pointed out that no offence is made out under Section 69 of BNS.

‘The victim engaged into a sexual intercourse with the accused on several occasions claiming that it was forcible yet she married him and never complained about the same to anyone,’ the order stated.

The complaint was filed only because the accused now wanted to cancel the civil registration, it stated. ‘Technically, therefore, no offence is also made out under Section 69 of BNS. It is open for the victim to put forth her grievances before the Civil Court, where the annulment or divorce case may be filed,’ the court stated.

Discharging a 30-year-old man accused of raping a woman, a Sessions Court in Goa stated the allegation that the accused had sex with the victim without her consent during their civil marriage does not stand “as Indian law does not recognise marital rape.” The case pertains to a woman alleging that the “first sexual encounter” took place on July 13, 2024, after the couple completed “the first signature of civil marriage”. The victim alleged that the accused had forcible sexual intercourse with her, and despite this, she resolved to go ahead with the civil marriage, which took place on August 7, 2024.

Read More: 129 Wagons, 3 Engines: North Eastern Railway runs its longest ‘Awadh Mahashakti’ freight train

In an order on Thursday, Pooja C Kavlekar, Presiding Officer, Fast Track Special Court, (POCSO) Panaji, stated: “The complaint has been filed after the marriage is solemnised. The allegation that the accused during the subsistence of civil marriage had sex with the victim without her consent does not stand as Indian law does not recognize marital rape.” The court quoted the victim as alleging in her statement before the magistrate that the accused “does not wish to perform the religious marriage and wants to cancel the same”.

“This fact may have some moral repercussions. However, legally only because one party wants to cancel the marriage that is duly filed, the court cannot hold him responsible for the offence of rape, if the parties had sexual intercourse before performance of religious marriage,” the court stated.

The prosecution contended that between July 13 and August 6, the accused had forcible sexual intercourse with the complainant without her consent on several occasions and also threatened her with dire consequences. The prosecution submitted that in her statement, the victim stated that she and the accused are ‘civilly married’ and that the accused is refusing to marry her and has filed an application to cancel the marriage that was filed.

The prosecution stated the accused obtained consent of the victim The accused’s counsel contended for the accused to be discharged, contending that the accused is married to the victim on the date of filing the chargesheet and nothing survives in the case. The court concurred with the submission The court pointed out that the chargesheet is filed under Section 64 of BNS, which pertains to rape and not Section 69, which relates to sexual intercourse “The complainant in her complaint has requested the law enforcement personnel to take action against the accused for cheating her and for ‘committing sexual intercourse The court stated no offence is made out under Section 69 of BNS.

“The victim engaged into a sexual intercourse with the accused on several occasions claiming that it was forcible yet she married him and never complained about the same to anyone,” the order stated. The complaint was filed only because the accused now wanted to cancel the civil registration, it stated. “The accused has kept his promise and married the victim.

Technically, therefore, no offence is also made out under Section 69 of BNS. It is open for the victim to put forth her grievances before the Civil Court, where the annulment or divorce case may be filed,” the court stated.

Broader Impact and Sector Outlook