Patna: The Patna High Court has upheld 10-year imprisonment for a rape accused while stating that if a rape victim did not struggle at the time of rape or there was no evidence of damage to her private parts, it does not mean that the victim had given her consent. Justice AM Badar made the observation while hearing the bail plea of rape accused Islam Mian who filed the appeal against the order by a lower court, which sentenced the accused to 10 years and imposed a Rs 10,000 fine.
Also read: Satisfying carnal desires sans wife's consent is rape, says Karnataka High Court
The accused, a brick-kiln owner, had dragged a woman working in the kiln into the room and raped her on April 9, 2015. The High Court clarified that if it is proved in the lower court that the statement made by the woman is credible and correct, then the rape cannot be considered as mutual consent. The court referred to section 375 of the IPC according to which sexual relations can be established only after mutual consent. The court made it clear that in the absence of evidence that the victim did not physically struggle at the time of the rape, it cannot be deemed that the consent was taken.
