People enter into a Live in relationshiponly to avoid the responsibilities that accompany a marriage ,with a clear intention of ditching when it suits them.
They hide behind nonsensical statements like, ‘want to know the partner well’ and the like.
How many people, despite living matrimony have understood their spouses?
It is impossible to understand another human being.
You adjust and make compromises, that’s Life.
Do we understand ourselves?
Now to the issue of rape.
Both the partners have indulged in sexual intercourse by consent.
If the live in relationship breaks ,how does earlier intercourse becomes a rape?
It looks as if even married couple have to sign a bond consenting for sexual intercourse!
Again can not a Man claim the same privilege?(!)
You have entered into a relationship knowing the full implication.
One does not marry to remain a monk nor a woman a nun.
Please read my blog on rape.
A Delhi-based computer professional had no qualms in maintaining a live-in relationship for 8 years with a girl but when it came to marrying her, he quickly fell into the customary caste-based obligation to tie the knot with another girl chosen by his parents. Married just three months ago, now he faces rape charges brought against him by the erstwhile live-in partner. His last hope for protection against arrest went up in smoke on Friday as a vacation bench of the Supreme Court dismissed his bail plea.
Petitioner’s counsel argued that the erstwhile live-in partner had never complained of rape during the 8 year relationship and has filed a complaint with police accusing him of raping her only after learning that he was getting married.
A bench of Justices Deepak Verma and S J Mukhopadhaya said “for 8 years you remained together and now you have ditched her to marry another. That could be a reason for the complaint. But you face the charge.”
The two met in 2004 and stayed together as live-in partners towards the end of 2011. But, the man chickened out when his family and society opposed the match on the ground that the girl did not belong to the caste in which he could get married.
As soon as the girl came to know that he was going to marry another chosen by his parents, she filed a complaint with the police on February 4, just eight days before the date of his marriage. The counsel said the family elders intervened and settled the matter. The girl withdrew her complaint on February 8.
The boy got married on February 12 and the former live-in partner went to Mandawali police station on March 1 insisting on registration of her complaint accusing him of repeatedly raping her on the promise of marriage.
With the trial court and the Delhi High Court refusing to grant him bail, he had moved the Supreme Court seeking relief on the ground, among others, that he had been married just three months ago.