Booking a hotel room with a man is not consent to sexual intercourse: HC
The Bombay High Court ruled that a woman's hotel room booking doesn't imply consent to sex, overturning a previous court's decision in a rape case.
Mumbai: In a significant ruling, the High Court of Bombay at Goa has held that a woman’s consent to book a hotel room with a man cannot be construed as consent to sexual intercourse. Justice Bharat Deshpande, sitting as a single judge, overturned a 2021 order from a Margao trial court that had discharged a man of rape charges because the woman’s role in booking the hotel room implied consent to sexual activity.
The accused, Gulsher Ahmed, raped a young woman on March 3, 2020. According to the victim, Ahmed had lured her to the hotel under the pretext of offering a job abroad, only to assault her in the room under threats to her life. As soon as she escaped, she called the police, leading to Ahmed’s arrest. The trial court had originally concluded that her involvement in booking the room and her prior lunch with Ahmed indicated consent, making the charge of rape inapplicable.
Justice Deshpande’s order dismantles that reasoning, calling the trial court’s interpretation “clearly erroneous.” He asserted that merely entering a room with someone does not equate to consent for sexual relations. The victim’s immediate response of crying, fleeing the room, and notifying the police strongly indicated her lack of consent. He also noted that the hotel staff corroborated the victim’s account, which further supported the finding that the act was non-consensual.
In his ruling, Justice Deshpande underscored that considering a woman’s presence in a room with consent to sexual intercourse disregards established legal principles. This decision underscores an important precedent in interpreting consent in sexual assault cases, making clear that circumstances like jointly booking a room are insufficient grounds to infer consent for intimate acts.