Man sentenced to 10 years for raping mentally challenged woman; court rules consent irrelevant due to victim’s inability to comprehend. Victim’s mental age of 9 deemed incapable of consenting.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
MUMBAI: Recently, A sessions court has convicted and sentenced a 24-year-old man to 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment (RI) for raping a 23-year-old woman suffering from a mental disorder. The court ruled that sexual intercourse with a woman who is unable to comprehend the nature and consequences of the act, even if she gives consent, constitutes rape, regardless of her age. The victim, living in the accused’s neighborhood, was found to have a mental age equivalent to that of a 9-year-old girl.
During the trial, the prosecution presented evidence establishing that the accused and the survivor were the biological parents of an aborted fetus. The survivor was diagnosed with mild mental retardation, making her particularly vulnerable.
“The person raped the survivor because she was helpless. Someone with a mental disorder or unsoundness needs extra care and should not be treated badly.”
– emphasized Judge DG Dhoble in his remarks.
ALSO READ: Bombay HC Drops Rape Case Against Married Man
The defense attempted to challenge the prosecution’s case by cross-examining the survivor. She admitted to knowing the accused and having a consensual relationship with him. She further disclosed her desire to marry him but was impeded by her parents due to religious differences.
Notably, the survivor did not inform the accused about her pregnancy and initially refrained from disclosing his name to the police. She insisted that she had no complaint against the accused and claimed that her parents pressured her to file a First Information Report (FIR).
The accused relied on the survivor’s statements to argue that the relationship was consensual. However, the judge rejected this defense, emphasizing that the prosecution had successfully proven the survivor’s mild mental retardation. The judge cited Supreme Court precedents that established the incapacity of mentally-challenged individuals to give informed consent.
This verdict highlights the importance of providing special care and protection to individuals with mental disorders or illnesses. Such individuals are particularly vulnerable to exploitation and must be shielded from harm. The court’s judgment serves as a strong deterrent against acts of sexual violence targeting mentally challenged individuals.
ALSO READ: SC Agrees To Hear Case on Martial Rape
