Condom Found On Spot Doesn’t Mean Sexual Act Is Consensual, Says Mumbai Sessions Court
There is not one single day where I wake up and don’t come across news about rape and other crimes against women. It has become such a norm of sorts in our society that it is disturbing. And while lawyers defending a rape accused are in a way doing their job, often because they might be court appointed, the defence has been getting quite creative with their arguments to prove that the sex was consensual and not rape. At a recent bail hearing at Mumbai’s sessions court, the accused said that there was a condom found on the spot where the alleged incident took place. And this ought to indicate that the sex was consensual.
The man arrested is a naval staff member, who was accused of raping his colleague’s wife. The lawyer defending his case argued that a condom was found at the scene where the alleged act is said to have taken place. And therefore, this would indicate that the sexual act was consensual.
However, in an astute move, the Mumbai sessions court dismissed the lawyer’s argument, stating that just because a condom was found on the spot doesn’t mean that the sexual act was consensual. The court observed, “Merely because the condom was found at the spot of the incident is not sufficient to come to a conclusion that the complainant was having consensual relations with the applicant. The possibility of the accused using the condom to avoid further complications cannot be ruled out.“
Also Read: Woman Offered Cold Drink Laced With Sedatives, Gang Raped In A Hotel
According to the Times of India, the victim in question was living with her husband in the adjoining quarters to the accused. The alleged rape took place when her husband was away for training in Kerala. As per police reports, the accused gave the woman chocolate, after which she experienced a severe headache. It was then that the woman approached him for medicine and the accused man gave her paracetamol. Sometime after that, the man grabbed the woman, gagged her, and then raped her. The accused after being arrested for rape had applied for bail on the basis that there was another man there and that a condom was found on the spot.
Further probe and investigation, also revealed that the woman tried attacking the accused man with a blade and when he dodged it, she harmed herself by cutting her wrist. The next day she told her husband what had happened and when he returned to the city, they filed a report with the police. The accused has stated that he is being falsely implicated, and that there was another man in the house which would make it impossible for him to commit the crime. To further strengthen his argument, he even showed the court that a condom was found on the spot of the incident. This argument was rejected and dismissed by Mumbai’s session court.
Also Read: Woman Sends Condoms To Justice Ganediwala To Protest Against Her Controversial ‘Skin To Skin’ Ruling
And rightly so! I mean, just because a condom was found in the same spot does not mean that it a sexual act is consensual. If a sexual crime is premeditated, a rapist can easily plan and find the opportunity to wear a condom during the non-sensual act, to ensure that no damning evidence can be found that might link them to the crime. If this is the only defence, then it is definitely one with a lot of holes and rightly does not stand in court.
