The 30-year-old woman who filed a complaint against Jose Thettayil MLA submitted before the High Court on Tuesday that she was subjected to sexual exploitation by Thettayil without her consent and against her will.
In an affidavit, she submitted that Thettayil became closer to her and sexually exploited her two times, after promising to get his son married to her. Though talks were made with regard to the solemnisation of marriage directly and also through mediators, Thettayil and his son retracted from their promise.
“After proposing me as a bride for his son and promising to solemnize the marriage, Thettayil cannot in anyway be justified in coming at this later stage by saying that I am a 30-year-old divorcee. I have never fabricated false evidence against the accused persons,” the woman submitted.
She said that the consent if any given by her was under a misconception of facts. The MLA’s son had promised to marry her before having sex on the first occasion and the petitioner gave her a promise to give his son in marriage to her before the sexual act on both occasions. Hence the allegations in the complaint puts the offence under section 376 (rape) of IPC against Thettayil.
Citing several orders from the Supreme Court and various High Courts, she stated that submission of the body by the complainant under the misconception of facts cannot be construed as a consensual sexual act as in section 375 of IPC. The consent obtained by undue influence was a non-consent. To unearth the truth the custodial interrogation of the accused is essential.
She added that her complaint was neither a private one prepared with the assistance of a legal practitioners nor a first information statement taken down by an experienced police officer. It was only a layman’s complaint prepared by her. Hence the court should take it in such perspective only.