In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has declared that sexual relations with a minor wife, even if consensual, constitute rape and are not permissible under the law. The Nagpur bench of the High Court upheld a 10-year prison sentence for a man who was convicted following a complaint of rape filed by his wife.
Justice G.A. Sanap emphasized that the age of consent is above 18 years, stating, “It is imperative to clarify that any sexual relations with a girl under the age of 18 is considered rape, regardless of her marital status.”
The court stressed, “Consent is not a viable defense when the girl in question is below 18 years of age.” This comment came while the court maintained the sentence and the 10-year rigorous imprisonment imposed by the lower court.
The accused had initially forced the complainant into sexual relations, which led to her pregnancy. Subsequently, he married her. Their marital relations later deteriorated, leading to her filing a rape complaint against him.
“If one were to entertain the argument that they were supposedly married,” the court remarked, “the accusations made by the victim that she was coerced into the relationship would still classify it as rape.”
The couple, from Wardha, Maharashtra, were neighbors before the complaint in 2019, and had been in a romantic relationship for 3-4 years. However, the victim had consistently rejected the accused’s proposals for physical intimacy.
Initially, the accused had promised to marry the young woman and even staged a fake marriage ceremony in a rented room in the presence of some neighbors. His behavior later became abusive, including physical assaults and pressures to abort the pregnancy. He eventually denied paternity, accusing her of bearing another man’s child.
In his defense, the accused claimed that the sexual relations were consensual and that the complainant was his wife. However, Justice Sanap noted, “In my view, this argument cannot be accepted for several reasons. The prosecution has proven that on the date of the crime, the victim was under 18 years of age.”
The bench noted that DNA reports confirmed that the accused and the complainant were the biological parents of the child born from this relationship.
