Absence of injuries does not imply consensual sex: Patna High Court
In a significant judgment, Patna High Court has ruled that if any internal or external injuries do not appear during sexual assault, it does not means that the victim was involved in consensual sex
In a significant judgment, the Patna High Court has ruled that if any internal or external injuries do not appear during sexual assault, it does not means that the victim was involved in consensual sex.
A bench of Justice Ananta Manohar Badar, while hearing the appeal against the lower court's judgement in the 2015 Jamui rape case, overturned the verdict, holding that it is not necessary that internal or external wounds on the body of victim be needed as a proof of rape being committed.
He cited a clause of Section 375 of IPC which makes it clear that only because a woman does not physically resist the act of penetration, it cannot be regarded as consenting to the sexual activity.
The victim was a daily wage labourer of a brick kiln in Jamui. She had demanded her wages from the owner who promised her to give the money at the end of the day. He then went to her house, dragged inside the room, pinned her down on the floor and raped her.
The court said that if the statement of the victim is reliable and trustworthy and it is support by circumstantial evidence, the incident can be treated as rape and not considered consensual sex.