Sex before marriage is Rape says Delhi HC, is it right?

The High Court of Delhi, ruled that s*x before marriage is rape: Do you agree. LCI members please comment.

can u refer the judgement.? This must be a conditional sentence.!!!!!

It was announce in this forum.

Go to Criminal forum, it is there.

 NR. ASSUMI,        PLEASE      ELABORATE      THE         JUDGMENT     SO       THAT        MEMBER   CAN      ANSWER

it is difficult to make any comment without going through the judgment. if two unmarried man and woman both voluntarily cohabit when they both are adult in the eye of law , can it be termed as rape?

Once again, please go to criminal forum, it is there.

Go to news and updates of this forum, it is there.

It is there in this forum in Criminal section; just click criminal section of this forum.

New Delhi: The Delhi high court on Monday held that s*x without marriage amounted to rape.
 

The court rejected pre-arrest bail to a man who repeatedly had s*x with a woman but refused to marry her even after their engagement.

The woman stayed with her fiance, Nikhil Prasar, in Mumbai for a few days, “where they had fun, and then went to Delhi and stayed in a hotel where they had s*x”.

When it came to fixing a date for marriage, however, Nikhil refused, on the grounds that he had learned that she belonged to a different caste.

The woman complained to the police and a rape case was registered.

Justice VK Jain said the caste factor was an afterthought by Prasar, who then absconded. Could he marry “any girl merely because she belonged to a particular caste or sub-caste, even if he did not approve of her personality, temperament, education, culture, upbringing, and family background", the court asked.

“The answer can, obviously, be in the negative," justice Jain said.

He said it appears that the man did not intend to marry the woman and that was why he did not wait for s*x even till his formal engagement with her.

If he were so orthodox and conservative that he broke the marriage owing to caste differences, he should not have hurried in for s*xual intercourse before marriage, the justice said.

The court held that if it was not held as rape, it would “result in unscrupulous and mischievous persons taking undue advantage of innocent girls by promising marriage with them".

Sexual intercourse before marriage amounts to rape or it will result in victimisation or exploitation of innocent girls, justice Jain said.