The Delhi High Court has strongly criticised the argument that a woman should expect marriage problems if she is older than her partner, calling it "patriarchal" and "misogynistic."

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said this while rejecting a request to cancel a police case (FIR) against a man accused of raping a woman by falsely promising to marry her. The court said this argument had no legal value and wasn’t valid. The judge explained that if a woman trusts a man’s promises and starts a relationship with him, it shouldn’t be seen as an obsession just because the man later changes his mind and breaks those promises.

"The submission (of man's counsel) that a woman must assume additional responsibility and foresee marriage-related difficulties solely because she is elder to her partner is based on a patriarchal and legally flawed premise," said Justice Sharma on March 20.

The judge added, "Such an argument not only lacks legal standing but also reflects a misogynistic perspective that seeks to impose an unreasonable burden on the victim while absolving the petitioner of accountability for his own assurances and conduct."

Considering the seriousness of the allegations and the evidence presented, the court said there was no valid reason to cancel the FIR. It rejected the man’s petition to quash the case.

Woman claims betrayal and financial exploitation

The case is about a woman who says a man forced her into a physical relationship, including unnatural sex, between 2018 and 2021 by falsely promising to marry her. She said they became friends while working together, and he promised they would have a future together. He even told her to say no to other marriage proposals. She also claimed that she helped him financially many times. However, she said his behavior later changed, and he started ignoring her.

When the man refused to marry her or return the money she had lent him, she filed a police complaint in May 2021.

The man’s lawyer argued that the relationship was consensual and that the woman was aware of potential obstacles like financial issues and family opposition, especially their age difference. The court dismissed this argument, calling it unfair and biased.

You might also be interested in: Man rapes mentally challenged minor, court reduces jail term because he's 'family man'