By Lovisha Aggarwal | February 06, 2019
Daniel Crasto vs. The State of Maharashtra (decided on January 30, 2019)
Bombay High Court (Mrs. Mridula Bhatkar, J.)
1. Extra marital consensual sexual relationship between adults of same sex may be a ground for divorce on the ground of cruelty to the wife. But it does not constitute offence under section 377 because both are adults and had sexual relationship by consent.
2. A wife whose husband has extra-marital consensual sexual relationship with same sex partner is an aggrieved person but she cannot be called as a victim under section 377 of IPC.
1994: Husband and Wife got married and had a son together.
1999: Wife realised that her husband is a gay and she opposed parallel relationship of her husband. He even ill-treated the wife, hence, she left the house. Thereafter, she came back.
2007: wife found that her husband was having sexual relationship with the petitioner and that her husband watched pornographic videos of himself and petitioner whenever he misses the petitioner.
Husband ill-treated wife on a number of occasions and she alleged that he had unnatural sexual intercourse with her.
2009: Wife lodged an FIR and her husband and petitioner were prosecuted for voluntarily causing hurt (section 323), intentionally insulting the wife to provoke her to break peace (section 504) and Unnatural offences (Section 377).
2012: In a Revision Application, Petitioner was discharged from section 323 and 504 but maintained the charge under section 377 of the IPC.
2012: Petitioner filed Writ Petition before Bombay HC
ThePetitioner is discharged from section 377 of IPC because both are adults and had sexual relationship by consent.
Read the complete Judgement here