Bombay High Court quashes rape case against lawyer, says it was relationship gone sour

The Bombay High Court recently quashed a rape case against a Mumbai lawyer, ruling that the allegations were the result of a relationship that had soured [Tapan Thatte v State of Maharashtra].

The bench comprising Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande noted that the complainant was married when she had gotten into a physical relationship with the accused and had chosen to be with him on her own free will.

"It is not merely a case of 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 Court said while quashing the case.

The case involved Tapan Anant Thatte (petitioner/ accused), who faced charges under Sections 376(2)(n)(repeated rape), 504 (intentional insult), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) after a complaint was filed by a woman.

Thatte and the complainant were classmates and had studied at the same school. They had later drifted apart with the passage of time and had gotten busy in their respective lives but they once again came into the contact with each other sometime in January 2020.

The woman was then married and staying in United States with her husband but she had chosen to return to India with her child after marital discord.

She decided to get a divorce and contacted Thatte since he was a lawyer.

The complainant claimed that during this vulnerable period, Thatte took advantage of her emotional state, leading to an intimate relationship which she sometimes felt was against her will.

In his defense, Thatte argued that the relationship was consensual. He pointed out that the woman had willingly moved in with him in September 2020 with her family's permission.

He also claimed that financial transactions between them included ₹33 lakh transferred to his account of which ₹28 lakh was a loan and ₹5 lakh was for legal services.

Thatte stated that he had repaid the loan by August 2022 and claimed that the complainant later demanded an additional ₹5 lakh, threatening to file a false complaint if he refused.

During the hearings, Thatte's counsel argued that the complainant's allegations were baseless and that she had voluntarily entered into the relationship. It was emphasized that she had lived with him for several months without resistance.

On the other hand, the complainant's counsel contended that she had been manipulated during a vulnerable time in her life. They argued that the accused had exploited her trust and that the financial transactions were part of a broader pattern of emotional and financial abuse.

After reviewing the FIR and chargesheet, the Court concluded that the allegations of rape under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC were not substantiated.

"From the complaint itself, it is evident that, the Petitioner and the Respondent No.2, being two consenting adults had indulged in a relationship, which is gone wrong and sour, as a result the respective parties have filed criminal proceedings against each other," the Bench said.

It found that the complainant had willingly engaged in the relationship and did not provide sufficient evidence to support her claims of coercion or abuse.

Hence, the Court quashed the chargesheet, ruling that the case did not warrant further legal proceedings.

Advocate Satyavrat Joshi instructed by advocate Samay Pawar appeared for Thatte.

Additional Public Prosecutor SV Gavand appeared for the State.

Advocate Anjali Patil appeared for the complainant- woman.

[Read Judgment]