Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Relationship Gone Sour Not Ground for Rape Charge: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, led by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, Mehran Anjum Mir, in the FIR No. 584/2023 under Sections 376/328 IPC. This landmark judgment centered on the complexities of consent and privacy in the context of a sexual assault allegation.

Justice Bhatnagar's observations highlighted the nuanced nature of consent and relationships. He noted, "what is the effect of these WhatsApp chats and whether they can stand the test of admissibility would be seen during the course of trial," acknowledging the challenges in determining the consensual nature of a relationship from digital communications.

The case delved into the allegations made by the complainant, who claimed that Mir, under the pretense of marriage, had non-consensually engaged in sexual intercourse with her. Mir's defense hinged on their purported consensual relationship and the argument that the allegations stemmed from a relationship turned bitter.

A critical aspect of the judgment was the court's stance on the admissibility of electronic evidence. Citing the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution, the court questioned the legality of the call recordings presented. "The evidentiary value is to be given to these call recordings is a matter of trial," Justice Bhatnagar stated, emphasizing the importance of evaluating such evidence thoroughly.

This case also referenced notable precedents, including Sanjay Pandey Vs. Directorate of Enforcement and Navdeep Singh @ Gaurav Vs. State of NCT of Delhi, which underscored the court's careful consideration of privacy rights and the authenticity of electronic evidence.

Date of Decision: 20 December 2023

MEHRAN ANJUM MIR  VS STATE GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI    

 

Latest Legal News