{"id":249332,"date":"2021-06-05T10:35:48","date_gmt":"2021-06-05T05:05:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=249332"},"modified":"2021-06-18T11:28:23","modified_gmt":"2021-06-18T05:58:23","slug":"consent","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/","title":{"rendered":"Consent v. Capacity to consent for sexual act; Supreme Court of Canada clarifies link between the two"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of Canada:<\/strong> The Bench of Wagner C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, C\u00f4t\u00e9, Brown, Rowe, Martin and Kasirer JJ., clarified the link between consent and capacity to consent. The Bench stated,<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cConsent and the capacity to give consent are<\/strong> inextricably joined, as subjective consent to sexual activity requires both that the complainant be capable of consenting and does, in fact, consent. Trial Judges are under no obligation to evaluate consent and capacity separately or in any particular order.<\/strong>\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

F and B were charged with sexually assaulting the 16-year-old complainant during a camping trip. The issue at trial was whether the complainant, who had consumed alcohol, had consented to the sexual activity with F and B. The complainant and F both testified and presented diametrically opposed versions of events; B did not testify. The Crown argued that the complainant\u2019s evidence clearly established incapacity due to intoxication, and also that the complainant had not agreed to the sexual activity. F and B submitted that the complainant was not credible and that she had not been as intoxicated as she claimed, and that she had agreed to engage in the sexual activity. The Trial judge accepted the complainant\u2019s evidence and convicted F and B of sexual assault.<\/p>\n

However, the Appellate Court concluded that the Trial judge failed to identify the relevant factors to consider when assessing whether intoxication deprived the complainant of her capacity to consent, and failed to consider the issue of consent first and separately from the issue of capacity. As a result, the Court of Appeal concluded that a new trial was necessary for both F and B.<\/p>\n

Consent and the capacity to give consent <\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

The Supreme Court opined that consent and the capacity to give consent are inextricably joined, as subjective consent to sexual activity requires both that the complainant be capable of consenting and does, in fact, consent. The Bench said that the Trial judges were under no obligation to evaluate consent and capacity separately or in any particular order as the complainant did not agree to the sexual activity in question, and that the trial judge\u2019s blending of consent and capacity revealed neither an error in law nor insufficient reasons. As where a complainant is incapable of consenting, there can be no finding of fact that the complainant voluntarily agreed to the sexual activity in question. The Bench clarified,<\/p>\n

\n

\u201c<\/strong>The capacity to consent is a necessary but not sufficient precondition to the complainant\u2019s subjective consent.<\/strong>\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Thus, when a trial engages both the issues of whether a complainant was capable of consenting and whether they did agree to the sexual activity in question, they both go to the complainant\u2019s subjective consent to sexual activity. Where the complainant is incapable of consenting, there can be no finding of fact that the complainant voluntarily agreed to the sexual activity in question. As capacity is a precondition to subjective consent, the requirements for capacity are tied to the requirements for subjective consent.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201c<\/strong>Capacity to consent requires that the complainant have an operating mind capable of understanding the physical act, its sexual nature, and the specific identity of their partner, and that they have a choice of whether or not to engage in the sexual activity in question.<\/strong>\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Appellate Courts not to Parse Trial Judge<\/strong>\u2019<\/strong>s Reasons in a Search for Error <\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

The Bench reminded the Appellate Court that the its task is not to finely parse Trial judge\u2019s reasons in a search for error, but rather to assess whether the reasons, read in context and as a whole in light of the live issues at Trial, explain what the Trial judge decided and why they decided that way in a manner that permits effective appellate review. Expressing its disappointment, the Bench stated that despite clear guidance since R. v. Sheppard, 2002 SCC 26, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 869, Appellate Courts had continue to scrutinize the text of trial reasons in a search for error, particularly in sexual assault cases, where safe convictions after fair trials were being overturned not on the basis of legal error but on the basis of parsing imperfect or summary expression on the part of the Trial judge.<\/p>\n

Four Requirements for Capacity <\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

The Four Requirements for Capacity for a complainant to be capable of providing subjective consent to sexual activity, is that they must be capable of understanding four things:
\n1. the physical act;
\n2. that the act is sexual in nature;
\n3. the specific identity of the complainant\u2019s partner or partners; and
\n4. that they have the choice to refuse to participate in the sexual activity.<\/p>\n

Since subjective consent requires the complainant to formulate a conscious agreement in their own mind to engage in the sexual activity in question: Capacity to consent requires that the complainant be capable of understanding what is required for subjective consent \u2014 no more, no less.<\/em><\/p>\n

Consequently, rejecting the respondents\u2019 argument that the complainant\u2019s claim of incapacity was belied by her thorough recollection of the sexual activity, the Bench explained,<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cThe question is not whether the complainant remembered the assault, retained her motor skills, or was able to walk or talk. The question is whether the complainant understood the sexual activity in question and that she could refuse to participate.<\/strong>\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Hence, the Bench held that the Trial judge explained what he found and why, and what he found was that the respondents committed a sexual assault upon the extremely intoxicated complainant, who was passed out when the assault commenced. Therefore, the convictions were safe and the Trial judge made no error. The Appellate Court order was set aside and the respondents\u2019 convictions were restored.[Her Majesty The Queen v. G.F., 2021 SCC OnLine Can SC 2<\/b><\/a>, decided on 14-05-2021]<\/p>\n

\n

Kamini Sharma, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of Canada: The Bench of Wagner C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, C\u00f4t\u00e9, Brown, Rowe, Martin and Kasirer JJ., clarified the <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":32072,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[46134,3239,29785,43850,14331],"class_list":["post-249332","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-foreigncourts","tag-capacity","tag-consent","tag-law","tag-sexual-act","tag-trial-judges"],"yoast_head":"\nConsent v. Capacity to consent for sexual act; Supreme Court of Canada clarifies link between the two | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Consent\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Consent v. Capacity to consent for sexual act; Supreme Court of Canada clarifies link between the two\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Consent\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-06-05T05:05:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-06-18T05:58:23+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/\",\"name\":\"Consent v. Capacity to consent for sexual act; Supreme Court of Canada clarifies link between the two | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-06-05T05:05:48+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-06-18T05:58:23+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Consent\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887,\"caption\":\"Canada SC\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Consent v. Capacity to consent for sexual act; Supreme Court of Canada clarifies link between the two\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Consent v. Capacity to consent for sexual act; Supreme Court of Canada clarifies link between the two | SCC Times","description":"Consent","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Consent v. Capacity to consent for sexual act; Supreme Court of Canada clarifies link between the two","og_description":"Consent","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-06-05T05:05:48+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-06-18T05:58:23+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/","name":"Consent v. Capacity to consent for sexual act; Supreme Court of Canada clarifies link between the two | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg","datePublished":"2021-06-05T05:05:48+00:00","dateModified":"2021-06-18T05:58:23+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Consent","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg","width":1330,"height":887,"caption":"Canada SC"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/05\/consent\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Consent v. Capacity to consent for sexual act; Supreme Court of Canada clarifies link between the two"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_canada.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":320967,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/29\/sa-court-reinstates-acquitted-mans-conviction-of-rape-on-love-interest\/","url_meta":{"origin":249332,"position":0},"title":"Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa restores conviction of man accused of raping his love interest","author":"Editor","date":"April 29, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court held that \u2018act of sexual penetration\u2019 meant that one party must agree\/ consent to engage in a particular act of sexual penetration with another, in light of Section 3 of the Sexual Offences Act.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Supreme-Court-of-Appeal-of-South-Africa.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Supreme-Court-of-Appeal-of-South-Africa.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Supreme-Court-of-Appeal-of-South-Africa.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Supreme-Court-of-Appeal-of-South-Africa.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":257910,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/11\/30\/man-with-autistic-disorder-expresses-desire-to-engage-in-sexual-relations\/","url_meta":{"origin":249332,"position":1},"title":"Man with autistic disorder expresses desire to engage in sexual relations: Does he understands requirement of \u2018consent\u2019 from another sexual partner? UK SC explains","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 30, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"To have capacity to decide to have sexual relations with another person, does a person need to understand that the other person must have the capacity to consent to the sexual activity and must in fact consent before and throughout the sexual activity?","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":327436,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/27\/bombay-hc-rape-false-pretext-of-marriage-consent-based-on-fear-of-injury-misconception-of-facts-refused-quashing-of-proceedings\/","url_meta":{"origin":249332,"position":2},"title":"\u2018Consent derived in fear of injury or misconception of fact is no consent\u2019: Bombay HC refuses to quash proceedings against accused for offences including rape","author":"Editor","date":"July 27, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court noted that Section 90 of IPC does not define the term \u201cconsent\u201d, but the law does not see \u201cconsent derived from a fear of injury and misconception of fact\u201d as consent.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":196019,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/15\/consent-for-sexual-intercourse-under-misconception-of-fact-is-not-free-consent\/","url_meta":{"origin":249332,"position":3},"title":"Consent for sexual intercourse under misconception of fact is not free consent","author":"Saba","date":"May 15, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Sushil Kumar Palo, J. dismissed a petition after observing the factual and legal aspects, while referring to the essence of Sections 90 and 375 IPC. The petitioner had been in contact with the prosecutrix through the social media platform \u201cFacebook\u201d\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":344434,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/26\/woman-willingly-accompanied-accused-to-hotel-room-sc-quashes-rape-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":249332,"position":4},"title":"\u2018Alleged offence was repeated thrice in the same manner, when woman willingly accompanied accused to hotel room\u2019: SC quashes rape case against 22-year-old man","author":"Editor","date":"March 26, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThere was no promise of marriage to coerce consent from the complainant for sexual intercourse.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Rape case quashed","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/Rape-case-quashed.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/Rape-case-quashed.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/Rape-case-quashed.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/Rape-case-quashed.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":197546,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/27\/rape-accused-granted-bail-on-finding-the-sexual-relationship-to-be-consensual\/","url_meta":{"origin":249332,"position":5},"title":"Rape accused granted bail on finding the sexual relationship to be \u201cconsensual\u201d","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 27, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Bench comprising of Dipak Misra, C.J. and A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ. upheld the bail granted to a rape offender by the Hon\u2019ble Hyderabad High Court. In the present petition, the learned bench of the Supreme Court Judges by emphasising on the essence of \u201cconsent\u201d in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249332","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=249332"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249332\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/32072"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=249332"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=249332"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=249332"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}