DEFINING CONSENT LIMITS IN THE EYE OF LAW
The Karnataka High Court recently passed a significant judgment on dating apps, quashing the rape case Sampras Anthony vs. State of Karnataka, which was filed against the petitioner based on a complaint by a woman he met through the dating app Bumble. The decision helped in safeguarding and preventing the misuse of rape laws involving consensual relationships. In today’s era as technology is evolving, people meet and interact, and courts are also increasingly getting criminal complaints emerging from relationships formed online. This ruling addressed the legal complexities around relationships formed through dating apps and the issue of consent.
The petitioner was a 23-year-old who was booked by a woman he met through the dating app Bumble. They were in a relationship for a year, exchanging intimate chats and photos through social media. After that, they decided to meet and spend a night at a hotel. They met, dined, and checked into a hotel. The woman said that during their encounter, she withdrew consent, but the petitioner engaged in sexual intercourse. The women later filed an FIR against the petitioner alleging rape under section 64 BNS 2023.
The petitioner approached the High Court seeking quashing for the proceedings; he said that the relationship was consensual and showed chats and conversations that proved mutual interest, and police officials ignored the digital evidence.
The high court of Karnataka, Justice M. Nagaprasanna, passed the order and took a note on the submission made by the petitioner that,
“The chats are not in good taste, nor can they be reproduced in the course of the order. It would only indicate that the acts between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent/complainant are all consensual.”
The definition of rape in BNS is similar to that under the IPC. The essence lies in the absence of consent. Courts have clarified that if consent was present, then it’s not rape. The Judgments are crucial for the interpretation of consent under the BNS section 63 definition.
“Unequivocal voluntary agreement when the woman, by words, gestures, or any form of verbal communication, communicates willingness to participate in the specific sexual act.”
The high court of Karnataka, in the case, used the digital evidence to prove the relationship and sexual encounter met the legal definition of unequivocal voluntary agreement and concluded that the complaint was an attempt to misuse the legal process.
“The Apex Court, in the afore-quoted judgments, has etched with clarity the nuanced distinction between consensual intimacy and the grave allegation of rape. A relationship born of mutual volition, even if it founders in disappointment, cannot, save in the clearest of cases, be transmuted into an offense under the criminal law. If the present prosecution were permitted to meander into a trial, it would be nothing but a ritualistic procession towards miscarriage of justice and indeed become an abuse of the process of the law,” the Court said.
The Karnataka High Court quashed the case and further issued the warning marking the dangers of dating applications, which will lead to complicated legal situations in the future.
About Author
I am Pallavi Sharma, a legal practitioner and researcher with a growing interest in cyber law, constitutional law, and women’s and child rights. I recently started to contribute through analytical writing and awareness initiatives on contemporary legal issues.
An eye opening article and creating awareness in the mind of people. Good article keep writing like this way . Good efforts by the author.