In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court recently quashed a rape case against Mumbai-based lawyer Tapan Anant Thatte, stating that the allegations stemmed from a consensual relationship that later turned bitter. The Court observed that pursuing the case further would amount to an abuse of the legal process, given the lack of evidence to substantiate the complainant’s claims.
The division bench comprising Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande noted that the complainant, who was married at the time of the relationship, had engaged with the accused of her own free will.
“It is not merely a case of a relationship having gone sour, but even financial transactions appear to have gone wrong… If the criminal procedures are allowed to be continued, it is not likely to result in conviction. Therefore, it would amount to abuse of process of law if such proceedings are allowed to be continued,” the bench remarked in its order.
Case Background
The case involved allegations against Thatte under Sections 376(2)(n) (repeated rape), 504 (intentional insult), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The complainant, a former classmate of Thatte, had reconnected with him in 2020 after marital discord prompted her return to India from the United States.
Seeking legal counsel for her divorce, she alleged that Thatte took advantage of her vulnerable emotional state, leading to an intimate relationship that she claimed was sometimes against her will. However, Thatte maintained that their relationship was consensual and pointed out that the woman had voluntarily moved in with him with her family’s knowledge in September 2020.
Financial Disputes and Counterclaims
The case was further complicated by financial transactions between the two. According to Thatte, ₹33 lakh was transferred to his account by the complainant, of which ₹28 lakh was a loan, and ₹5 lakh was for legal services. He claimed to have repaid the loan by August 2022 but alleged that the complainant later demanded an additional ₹5 lakh, threatening to file a false complaint if he refused.
The complainant, on the other hand, accused Thatte of exploiting her emotionally and financially during the relationship. Her counsel argued that the financial dealings were part of a broader pattern of abuse and manipulation.
Court’s Observations
The Court, after reviewing the FIR and chargesheet, found insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations of coercion or non-consensual acts under Section 376(2)(n).
“From the complaint itself, it is evident that the petitioner and the respondent, being two consenting adults, had indulged in a relationship, which has gone wrong and sour,” the bench noted.
The judges emphasized that the complainant’s own account indicated mutual consent, and no credible evidence supported her claims of coercion or abuse.
Verdict
In quashing the chargesheet, the Court ruled that the continuation of criminal proceedings was unwarranted, as they were unlikely to lead to a conviction. The case highlights the judicial emphasis on distinguishing consensual relationships from criminal conduct while safeguarding the integrity of the legal process.
