Women of the world, think twice before consenting to sexual intercourse and then crying "rape" as the courts might just see through your act and severely reprimand you for having led them astray with your histrionics and lamentations........
A man who was accused of "rape" by his sister-in-law who incidentally also levelled charges of making false promises pertaining to matrimony against him was acquitted of all charges levelled against him by a Delhi court as the sister-in-law was a more than willing participant in coitus in the esteemed court's or then should I say judge's opinion........
The court opined that "prima facie, it is indeed difficult to believe or accept that a married woman in her late 20's would be gullible enough to be taken in by promises of matrimony made by none other but her very own brother-in-law".........
Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhatt also acerbically remarked that "there is not an iota or shred of evidence to prove or suggest that the accused had either duped or deceived the prosecutrix by dangling the carrot of marriage before her and thereby obtaining her consent for the sexual act".......
"The prosecrutix (woman in question) was more than 29 years of age at the time and the mother of a young son to boot when she began the sexual dalliance with her brother-in-law, while the accused was unmarried at the time", the judge added........
"The same tantamounts to nothing more than the prosecutrix having indulged in an extra marital relationship with her brother-in-law for reasons only known to herself and her actions only prove or highlight promiscuity on her part and no criminality can be foisted or burdened on the accused for the very same reason", the learned judge concluded during the course of his astute judgement........
The accused a native of Rajasthan was nabbed or then arrested by the Delhi Police personnel in December last (2013) after his sister-in-law had accused him of raping her on numerous occasions since January 2013 onwards..........
She also alleged that the accused was well acquainted with the fact that her husband and her shared a far from satisfying conjugal life and that they had not indulged in the sexual act for many moons; he took undue advantage of the existing situation and established sexual relations with me by dangling the promise of marrying me as soon as as I divorced my lawfully wedded husband.......
She also alluded to the fact that the accused had "symbolically" married her by applying vermillion in her hair's parting and promised marriage whenever the two of them indulged in coitus.......
However to her consternation and dismay, the court duly noted the fact that the prosecrutix (woman) had more than willingly consented to the sexual act after the accused (brother-in-law) impressed upon her the fact that making love was an integral part of the relationship that two lovers shared amongst themselves........
"Wasn't the prosecrutix wise enough to separate the grain from the chaff and why did she get taken in by her brother-in-law's protestations of love and marriage despite being much older than him and being married to his elder brother for the last nine years and more", the learned judge questioned........
"It is abundantly clear or evident that she did not even make an effort towards offering cursory resistance and also made no effort whatsoever towards fleeing from the spot at the first instance.....It was incumbent upon her to weigh the pros and cons of the situation and end the relationship forthwith as she was far from a nubile nymphet, but a married woman of almost 29 years of age and the mother of a 7 year old son to boot", the judge opined.......
"There was no force exerted by the accused and the prosecrutix has woefully failed to prove the charges levelled by her against her brother-in-law (accused)", the judge acerbically remarked before summarily dismissing the case from his august presence.........
There is certainly a lesson in it somewhere for women who display the reprehensible tendency/propensity towards/of crying wolf a little too often for comfort; as their repeated attempts only raise questions over their credence, believability and character and the same is besmirched forever after an adverse judgement like the one above..........
A man who was accused of "rape" by his sister-in-law who incidentally also levelled charges of making false promises pertaining to matrimony against him was acquitted of all charges levelled against him by a Delhi court as the sister-in-law was a more than willing participant in coitus in the esteemed court's or then should I say judge's opinion........
The court opined that "prima facie, it is indeed difficult to believe or accept that a married woman in her late 20's would be gullible enough to be taken in by promises of matrimony made by none other but her very own brother-in-law".........
Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhatt also acerbically remarked that "there is not an iota or shred of evidence to prove or suggest that the accused had either duped or deceived the prosecutrix by dangling the carrot of marriage before her and thereby obtaining her consent for the sexual act".......
"The prosecrutix (woman in question) was more than 29 years of age at the time and the mother of a young son to boot when she began the sexual dalliance with her brother-in-law, while the accused was unmarried at the time", the judge added........
"The same tantamounts to nothing more than the prosecutrix having indulged in an extra marital relationship with her brother-in-law for reasons only known to herself and her actions only prove or highlight promiscuity on her part and no criminality can be foisted or burdened on the accused for the very same reason", the learned judge concluded during the course of his astute judgement........
The accused a native of Rajasthan was nabbed or then arrested by the Delhi Police personnel in December last (2013) after his sister-in-law had accused him of raping her on numerous occasions since January 2013 onwards..........
She also alleged that the accused was well acquainted with the fact that her husband and her shared a far from satisfying conjugal life and that they had not indulged in the sexual act for many moons; he took undue advantage of the existing situation and established sexual relations with me by dangling the promise of marrying me as soon as as I divorced my lawfully wedded husband.......
She also alluded to the fact that the accused had "symbolically" married her by applying vermillion in her hair's parting and promised marriage whenever the two of them indulged in coitus.......
However to her consternation and dismay, the court duly noted the fact that the prosecrutix (woman) had more than willingly consented to the sexual act after the accused (brother-in-law) impressed upon her the fact that making love was an integral part of the relationship that two lovers shared amongst themselves........
"Wasn't the prosecrutix wise enough to separate the grain from the chaff and why did she get taken in by her brother-in-law's protestations of love and marriage despite being much older than him and being married to his elder brother for the last nine years and more", the learned judge questioned........
"It is abundantly clear or evident that she did not even make an effort towards offering cursory resistance and also made no effort whatsoever towards fleeing from the spot at the first instance.....It was incumbent upon her to weigh the pros and cons of the situation and end the relationship forthwith as she was far from a nubile nymphet, but a married woman of almost 29 years of age and the mother of a 7 year old son to boot", the judge opined.......
"There was no force exerted by the accused and the prosecrutix has woefully failed to prove the charges levelled by her against her brother-in-law (accused)", the judge acerbically remarked before summarily dismissing the case from his august presence.........
There is certainly a lesson in it somewhere for women who display the reprehensible tendency/propensity towards/of crying wolf a little too often for comfort; as their repeated attempts only raise questions over their credence, believability and character and the same is besmirched forever after an adverse judgement like the one above..........
No comments:
Post a Comment