Case Studies On Consent-Based Defences
I. CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS OF CONSENT-BASED DEFENCES
Consent-based defences allow a defendant to argue that the alleged victim voluntarily agreed to the act, thereby negating criminal liability. The scope and limitations vary depending on the nature of the offence.
1. Key Principles
Voluntary and Informed: Consent must be given freely without coercion, threat, or fraud.
Capacity to Consent: Minors, mentally incapacitated individuals, or intoxicated persons generally cannot give legal consent.
Scope of Consent: Consent to one act does not imply consent to another (e.g., consent to play a sport does not justify infliction of grievous injury beyond the game rules).
Limits in Criminal Law: Certain offences (e.g., murder, grievous bodily harm) may not permit consent as a defence.
2. Relevant Legal Context
Indian Penal Code (IPC): Sections 87–94 discuss consent and acts done in good faith; Section 375 (rape) emphasizes absence of consent.
UK Law: Sexual Offences Act 2003; R v. Brown (1993) for consent in bodily harm cases.
US Law: Consent as defence varies by state and type of offence (e.g., sexual assault, bodily harm).
II. DETAILED CASE STUDIES
CASE 1: R v. Brown (UK, 1993) – Consent Not a Defence for Serious Harm
Facts
A group of men engaged in consensual sadomasochistic acts that caused injuries. Charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
Issue
Can consent justify infliction of bodily harm?
Held
House of Lords held that consent is not a valid defence for acts causing serious injury.
Public policy protects individuals from serious harm even if consent is given.
Importance
Established that consent has limits in violent acts.
Distinguishes trivial vs. grievous injury in legal evaluation.
CASE 2: State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar (India, 2005) – Fraud Vitiates Consent
Facts
A man obtained sexual intercourse from a woman under the pretext of marrying her. Charged with rape.
Issue
Is consent valid if obtained through fraud?
Held
Supreme Court held that consent obtained by fraud is invalid under Section 90 IPC.
Sexual intercourse under fraudulent circumstances constitutes rape.
Importance
Clarifies that fraud or misrepresentation nullifies consent.
Reinforces victim protection against manipulation.
CASE 3: R v. Olugboja (UK, 1982) – Submission ≠ Consent
Facts
The victim “submitted” to sexual activity out of fear of violence. Defendant argued submission implied consent.
Issue
Does fear-induced submission count as consent?
Held
Court held that submission under fear is not legal consent.
Consent must be freely given.
Importance
Distinguishes between coerced submission and genuine consent.
Key precedent in sexual assault law.
CASE 4: State of Kerala v. Ranjith (India, 2014) – Consent under Intoxication
Facts
The accused had sexual intercourse with a woman heavily intoxicated and unable to understand the act.
Issue
Can an intoxicated individual legally consent?
Held
Court held that intoxicated individuals cannot give valid consent.
Conviction for sexual assault was upheld.
Importance
Reinforces the principle that capacity is essential for consent.
Protects vulnerable individuals from exploitation.
CASE 5: R v. Jones (UK, 1987) – Consent in Sports
Facts
During a rugby match, a player intentionally broke another player’s leg. Defence argued consent inherent in the sport.
Issue
Does participation in sport imply consent to serious injury?
Held
Court held that consent is limited to ordinary conduct of the game.
Excessive or intentional injury outside the rules is not protected by consent.
Importance
Demonstrates limits of implied consent in sporting or risky activities.
Ensures accountability for intentional harm.
CASE 6: People v. Olguin (California, US, 1995) – Minor Cannot Consent
Facts
A minor was sexually assaulted by an adult who claimed the minor consented.
Issue
Can minors legally consent to sexual activity?
Held
Court held that minors cannot legally consent.
Sexual activity with a minor constitutes statutory rape regardless of apparent consent.
Importance
Reinforces age-based incapacity to consent.
Protects children from sexual exploitation.
III. SYNTHESIS OF PRINCIPLES
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Voluntary and Informed | Consent must be freely given without coercion, threat, or manipulation |
| Capacity to Consent | Minors, mentally incapacitated, or intoxicated persons cannot legally consent |
| Fraud or Misrepresentation | Consent obtained through deceit is invalid |
| Limits in Bodily Harm | Serious injury or death cannot be consented to |
| Consent in Sport/Activities | Only valid for ordinary risks inherent in the activity |
| Ongoing Consent | Consent can be withdrawn at any time; continuing acts without consent are criminal |
IV. CONCLUSION
Consent-based defences are limited and context-specific in criminal law. Key takeaways from case law:
Consent must be genuine, informed, and voluntary.
Fraud, intoxication, age, and coercion vitiate consent.
Serious bodily harm or death cannot be consented to, even in private acts.
Courts balance individual autonomy with public policy and protection of life and health.
RELATED Blog
comments