Educated and independent adults must be aware of the inherent uncertainties attached to relationships, the Court said.
The Delhi High Court recently clarified that the legal system must not be used to punish individuals when consensual relationships fail to end in marriage. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma emphasized that a collapsed romance between consenting adults is not a criminal act. She asserted that the judiciary must approach these cases with caution, prioritizing personal autonomy and freedom of choice over the criminalization of failed voluntary partnerships.
“An educated and independent adult, upon entering into a consensual relationship, must also recognise that the law cannot be invoked to criminalise the mere failure of a relationship. The dissolution of a relationship, by itself, does not give rise to criminal liability. Such matters must be approached with sensitivity, restraint, and due respect for the autonomy and choices of both individuals involved,” the Court said.
The court further noted that mature, educated adults should be aware of the inherent unpredictability of romantic commitments. Justice Sharma emphasized that when individuals enter relationships of their own free will, they must acknowledge that personal bonds come with no legal guarantee of permanence or a specific outcome, such as marriage.
“It is neither inevitable nor assured that every romantic relationship will result in marriage. Relationships may end for a variety of personal, practical, or circumstantial reasons, including incompatibility or change in individual priorities.”
These observations were made as the Court dismissed sexual assault and SC/ST Act charges against a Delhi academic. The case originated from a 2023 complaint alleging rape and caste-based abuse following the end of a long-term relationship. However, after examining WhatsApp transcripts and digital records, the bench found the relationship to be entirely consensual. The Court concluded that legal action was only initiated once the bond soured, finding no evidence that consent was obtained through a fraudulent or deceptive promise of marriage.
“In the present matter, the prosecutrix has levelled allegations against the petitioner, attracting the provisions of Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. Such allegations, by their very nature, are grave and carry serious consequences, with the potential to tarnish not only the reputation of the accused but also that of his family,” the Court added.
Advocates Bajinder Singh and Subhash Choudhary appeared for the petitioner, with Additional Public Prosecutor Manoj Pant representing the Delhi Police. The complainant was represented by counsels Tara Narula and Shivangi Sharma.
