The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed a case against a 73-year-old man accused of sexually abusing a woman since 1987, stating that the relationship was consensual. Justices A. S. Gadkari and Neela Gokhale noted that the details in the FIR showed both parties agreed upon the relationship.
The bench also noted the FIR was lodged in 2018 and there has been no explanation for the delay.
"The parties were indulging in sexual relationship for as many as 31 years. The complainant has never breathed a word about her alleged objection to the relationship," the court said.
"This is a classic case of relationship between the parties turning sour and thereafter the complainant lodging a police complaint," HC said.
As per the case, the woman had joined the man's company in 1987. At the time, the accused allegedly forcibly established sexual relations with her.
Thereafter, between July 1987 and 2017, for 30 years, the accused raped her at various hotels in Kalyan, Bhiwandi and other places.
It was claimed that in 1993, he promised to marry her, put a 'mangalsutra' around her neck, and called her his second wife. He also said she couldn't marry anyone else.
She said that after the man had a heart attack in 1996, she took care of the company. But in September 2017, when her mother got cancer, she had to take a break from work.
When she returned, she found the office closed and the gate locked. She contacted the man again, but he refused to marry her and wouldn’t return important documents or the gold 'mangalsutra.' He also refused to meet her.
The court noted that the FIR showed the woman knew the man was already married but still believed his promise to marry her.
"She is adult enough to know the law forbids a second marriage and there is no allegation in the complaint that the accused promised to divorce his first wife and then marry her. Even otherwise, this would purely be wishful thinking on the part of the woman that the accused will marry her after divorcing his existing wife," the court said.
In the past 31 years, there were many opportunities for the woman to break away and lodge a complaint against the accused but she did not do so, the HC bench noted.
(With PTI inputs)
