Labelling physical intimacy as rape after a relationship ceases to exist is illogical and harsh, the High Court noted in the order granting pre-arrest bail to 31-year-old Kerala rapper Vedan (Hiran Das Murali) on Wednesday. According to the complaint, Vedan allegedly sexually abused her after promising to marry her. An FIR was filed on July 31 based on the woman's complaint. The survivor also said that she was under psychiatric treatment for the last two years to recover from the psychological trauma that she had to undergo after the alleged rape committed by Vedan.

Vedan's counsel told the court that the allegations were false and that the relationship was consensual which did not crystallise into marriage for reasons of incompatibility. The court observed that the statement of the survivor revealed an instance of a romantic relationship that turned sour subsequently, and the parties involved broke up. The court also considered the contention that Vedan raped her, although she gave permission only to kiss her. However, the court took note of her statement, which said that after the alleged rape, he continued to stay with her in the apartment for the next three days and again visited her on several occasions and again stayed with her.

"It is baffling and difficult to comprehend, at this juncture at least, how, if the petitioner (Vedan) had raped her on the first day, she would still have allowed him to remain in her apartment for the following three days or even on later and regularly engage in a physical relationship with him. The above circumstances are prima facie, suggestive of a consensual relationship," Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas noted in the order.

According to the court, consent for sexual intercourse on a false promise of marriage and consent on the expectation or assumption of marriage are both different and labelling physical intimacy as rape after a relationship ceases to exist is illogical and harsh. The court also relied on past judgements to establish the distinction between a false promise given with the knowledge that it will be broken, and the breach of a promise which is made in good faith but subsequently not fulfilled. It said that merely because a promise to marry did not result in marriage that by itself need not necessarily mean that the sexual relationship was based on a false promise of marriage.

If the break up of a relationship between consenting couples lead to criminal proceedings and consequential arrest, it will have the tendency to destroy the future of an individual, the court said in the order. This proposition assumes significance especially when there are prima facie materials to assume that the relationship was all along consensual in nature and was between persons who had the ability to comprehend the nature of the act and its consequences.

The court granted anticipatory bail to Vedan on a set of conditions. He shall appear before the Investigating Officer from 10.00 am to 5.00 pm on September 9 and again at the same time on September 10 and submit himself to interrogation. If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioner, then, he shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for ₹1 lakh and two solvent sureties each for the like sum before the Investigating Officer.

He has been directed to appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and shall also co-operate with the investigation and he shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.