Consent in intimate relationships cannot be retrospectively withdrawn; criminal law should protect, not punish based on failed relationships.

JUDGMENT :

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

1. The petitioner – who is the complainant/prosecutrix in FIR bearing no. 698/2022, registered on 08.09.2022 at Police Station Jyoti Nagar, Delhi – has approached this Court by way of this revision petition, being aggrieved by the order dated 15.04.2024 [hereafter 'impugned order'] passed by the learned ASJ (SC-RC), East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi [hereafter 'Sessions Court'] in SC No. 72/2023 vide which the respondent no. 2 has been discharged from the offences punishable under Sections 376 (2)(n), 377, 341, 342, 493, 495, 201, 354D and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter ' IPC '] and respondent nos. 3 and 4 have been discharged from the offence punishable under Section 506 read with Section 34 of the .

FACTUAL BACKDROP

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that the prosecutrix (petitioner herein) had approached the police station on 07.09.2022 in a frightened condition and lodged a complaint alleging that she had first come into contact with the accused-respondent no. 2 on 01.09.2011 at Karkardooma Courts, where he had introduced himself as 'Guddu', claimed to be a Hindu and unmarried, and thereafter developed a relationship with her. It is alleged that during the subsistence of this relationship, respondent no. 2 subjected the prosecutrix to non-consensual physical relations, took her nude photographs, and thereafter continued to sexually exploit and blackmail her by threatening to make the photographs public. It is further alleged that on 14.01.2015, the prosecutrix was coerced into marriage with respondent no. 2, which was solemnised as per Hindu rites and ceremonies, and that she subsequently discovered that he was a Muslim by religion and was already married and having three children. The prosecutrix alleges that she was thereafter subjected to continuous cruelty, physical assaults, forced sexual relations, and unlawful confinement. It is further alleged that whenever the prosecutrix attempted to approach the authorities, respondent no. 2, being an advocate, used his influence to intimidate her and compelled her to withdraw the complaints. Owing to the continued harassment, she left the matrimonial home on 25.10.2021 and began residing in Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. It is alleged that respondent no. 2 traced her whereabouts and, along with respondents no. 3 and 4, and one Mobin, visited Meerut with the intent to cause her harm and roamed around her place of residence. In March 2022, the prosecutrix once again attempted to lodge a complaint; however, the same was withdrawn due to pressure exerted by respondent no. 2, following which she was allegedly taken back to his house and confined there. The prosecutrix thereafter lodged the present FIR while concealing herself from respondent no. 2

3. During the course of investigation, her medical examination was conducted on 07.09.2022 at DDU Hospital, which revealed a fracture in her hand, which was opined to be a grievous injury. The respondent no. 2-accused was arrested on 08.09.2022, and was