New Delhi: Ignorance of law cannot be a valid excuse for consent for physical relation with another person during the subsistence of marriage, a Delhi court has said. "Ignorance of law cannot be said to be a valid excuse of the prosecutrix (woman) to have consented for physical relations with the accused, during the subsistence of her marriage merely on the assurance that he would marry her," Additional Session Judge Kaveri Baweja said.
The court's observation came while acquitting a man of the charges of raping a married woman since 2012 on the false assurance of marriage. It said it appeared that the physical relations between the accused and woman were consensual.
The court rejected the submissions of the woman, a mother of two kids that she was unaware of the fact that according to Hindu law, she cannot marry for the second time during the subsistence of her first marriage.
"The plea of the woman that she was not aware that as per Hindu Law, second marriage is not permissible during the subsistence of first marriage, cannot be said to be a ground to hold that the consent of her was not voluntary," it said. "It is well settled law that the woman who is admittedly a Hindu, could not have remarried during the subsistence of her marriage with her husband.
"Thus, the claim of the woman that the accused was giving her assurance of marriage and that she consented for establishing physical relations with him on the said assurance by the accused, is also clearly not acceptable," the judge said, while deciding the case in two-and-a-half month.
The woman had lodged an FIR at Prasad Nagar Police Station here on May 4, alleging that she was raped and criminally intimidated by Delhi resident Vijay Kumar. The woman said that she was married but was not living with her husband for the last 3-4 years. She alleged that Kumar, on the false pretext of marriage, forcibly established physical relations with her and threatened to kill her, if she disclosed the incident to anyone.
