Repeated intimacy doesn’t mean consensual relationship, rules Madras high court

Madurai, A division bench of the Madras High Court ruled on Tuesday that repeated sexual intimacy does not automatically imply a consensual relationship, emphasizing the need for careful evaluation of context, coercion, and intent. The ruling was issued by Justices N Anand Venkatesh and K K Ramakrishnan, sitting at the Madurai bench, in a case involving the conviction of Kasi alias Suji for sexual exploitation and extortion against multiple women in Kanyakumari district in 2020. The court highlighted that the presence of coercion, deception, or intimidation must be thoroughly examined before determining that consent was given. It urged courts to scrutinize the entire course of conduct between the accused and the victim, including how the relationship began, the accused’s motivations, and whether the relationship was based on genuine affection or deliberate manipulation. The judges stressed that the law does not equate frequent intimacy with mutual agreement, especially when the victim lacks free and informed choice. The judgment also addressed the growing issue of "romance fraud," wherein individuals exploit the emotional vulnerabilities of young women through online interactions. The court warned against sharing intimate photos or videos via electronic means, noting that once such content leaves the victim’s control, it can lead to severe violations of privacy, dignity, and mental health. The judges called for heightened awareness and vigilance among young women and their families, urging them to protect their personal information in the digital age. The court emphasized that the rise of social media and digital communication has facilitated both positive human connections and new forms of exploitation. While these technologies have enhanced interpersonal interactions, they have also enabled crimes such as online luring, emotional manipulation, sexual exploitation, and cyber-enabled blackmail. The judges underscored the importance of timely reporting of such offenses to prevent further harm. The ruling confirmed a trial court order that had already convicted Suji of sexual exploitation and extortion. The case exemplifies what the court termed "rape by deception" and "sexual extortion," highlighting the dangers posed by individuals who manipulate trust for personal gain. The judges drew parallels between historical notions of modesty and modern-day challenges, referencing the biblical story of Adam and Eve to illustrate the enduring value of preserving personal privacy and dignity. The court acknowledged that the digital era has introduced novel risks, particularly for young women, who are often primary targets of such crimes. However, the judges noted that these issues affect all members of society, as technology-enabled sexual exploitation can target anyone. They encouraged greater societal awareness and collective responsibility in addressing these concerns. In delivering part of its judgment in English, the court reflected the broader significance of the case, underscoring the need for continued judicial scrutiny and public education on matters related to consent, privacy, and digital safety. The decision serves as a reminder that legal frameworks must evolve alongside technological advancements to effectively combat emerging forms of abuse.