
Relying upon the Supreme Court’s decision in Mahesh Damu Khare vs. the State of Maharashtra & Another, Justice Sunder Mohan of the Madras High Court dismissed the charge of rape against a man who led a woman up the garden path of marriage.
Having agreed to consensual sex, it is contradictory for a woman to later allege rape. Consent and rape are mutually exclusive concepts. If two adults choose to engage in premarital sex, it remains a private matter between them.
Allegations often arise about conversions to other faiths under the influence of promises or allurements, but ultimately, it is up to the individual to stand firm in their beliefs. Similarly, a woman should not yield to a man’s proposals of marriage, especially if it is clear he has ulterior motives.
Case 2: Presumption husband is father of child born during marriage holds even if wife had relations with another man
On January 28, the Supreme Court in Ivan Rathinam vs. Milan Joseph case said presumption husband is father of child born during marriage not displaced even if wife had relations with another man. Legitimacy and paternity go hand in hand unless otherwise proved.
A child is a product of a legitimately consummated marriage. Therefore, maintenance cannot be asked for from the alleged biological father or the paramour nor can he be subjected to truth test unless a complaint for paternity test is lodged and pursued.
Parenthetically, one shudders to think of the consequences for a child born of live-in relationship. Without the sanctity of marriage, it is entirely possible the child might be left high and dry if the live-in parents abandon it to its fate.
Case 3: Human rights commission’s recommendations are binding in nature
In Kiran Singh vs. National Human Rights Commission & Others, the Delhi High Court recently observed that both the state HRCs and NHRC are not toothless tigers nor helpless.
In Delhi, five persons were killed in an encounter which was questioned by a deceased’s parent. NHRC ordered CBI enquiry which however was brushed aside by the Home Ministry.
However, the Delhi High Court pointed out that the Human Rights Commission Act would be reduced to farce if the Commissions’ recommendations were merely recommendatory. No law is made just for the heck of it. On the contrary, all of them are made with a purpose. The Court also frowned upon the practice of making NHRC a party to a litigation. It is the state which has to defend it.
Case 4: It is for an employer to prescribe equivalence for qualification
The Allahabad High Court recently threw out a petition asking for Court intervention to make an employer bend and prescribe relaxation for lack of qualification on the touchstone of equivalence. That was purely the discretion of the employer. To wit, an employer may want to recruit a qualified engineer but may be amenable to employing a non-engineer with say 20 years of experience in the same job.
Indeed, there are people who learn on the job testifying to the general refrain that what is not taught in Harvard can be learnt while on the job. But Courts cannot be expected to sit in judgment and compel an employer to allow such leeway to an applicant.
Case 5: Celebrity playing truant at an event isn’t a breach of contract
Zareen Khan in 2018 accepted the invitation to attend a Kali Puja in Kolkata but couldn’t make it. The organisers were peeved. In a starstruck nation, roping in celebrities whether to endorse a brand or ensure large attendance in events is par for the course. But unless the celebrity charges for his/her appearance, no grievance can be made out of their non-appearance.
Parenthetically, it is also common for the marriage hosts to preannounce that a celebrity film star would be gracing the occasion. If such star plays truant, no grievance can be made unless the star had entered into a contract to perform as an artist in the marriage festivities.