When a woman states before the court that she did not consent to a physical relationship, the court shall not presume otherwise

Lisa Coutinho | Pravin Gandhi College of Law | 31st March 2020

Miss XYZ v. State of Gujarat & Anr. Criminal Appeal No. 1619 of 2019

Facts of the case:

The appellant was the Personal Assistant of the 2^nd respondent. She alleges that Respondent No. 2 had taken inappropriate pictures of her and used it to blackmailed her into having sexual contact with him. He also threatened her to terminate her employment if she did not act the way he desired. Later when the appellant’s marriage was fixed, he telephoned her fiancé and informed him that she is not of good character and had physical relationship with other boys. In view of these allegations, she registered a complaint against the 2nd Respondent for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 376, 499 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code. When the complaint was under investigation, the 2^nd respondent filed a criminal application before the Gujarat High Court seeking to quash the FIR itself and also further consequential steps taken pursuant to the registration of the crime. The High Court recorded that the findings fall under Exceptions 5 and 7 and that the allegations and facts mentioned in the FIR appears to be improbable and malicious. Therefore, it quashed the proceedings. Aggrieved, the appellant has approached the Supreme Court.

Judgment:

After hearing both sides and after perusing the impugned order and other material placed on record, the Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded the scope of its jurisdiction conferred under Section 482 of Crpc, and quashed the proceedings. Even before the investigation was completed, the court entertained the writ petition and stalled further investigation.

Section 114-A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with the presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecution for rape. A reading of the aforesaid Section makes it clear that, where sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and the question is whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have been raped, and such woman states in her evidence before the Court that she did not consent, the court shall presume that she did not consent.

The Supreme Court set aside the order passed by the High Court without expressing its opinion on the merits of the complaint and allowed the investigating agency to proceed with further investigation in accordance with law. The Court further ordered the 2^nd respondent to appear before the concerned police station and co-operate with the investigation. Till then no coercive action shall be taken against him.