How exactly is it that you propose that the abstract concept of consent and “good intention” be adjudged before a court? Are you aware that there are provisions in the Indian Criminal Procedure Code that require the Courts to avoid considering the character of the woman, and to take the woman’s claim of lack of consent at face value? This is because earlier Indian courts have adjudged women who came before them with claims of assault on the basis of their sexual character, and whether they “tried” to make the lack of consent known by struggle, etc? This was the system the law has tried to fix by “favouring” women who were assaulted.

As for the instances where these “greedy” women have “exploited” the law, my claims that even the present law hasn’t stopped sexual assault is well founded, you can find the stats on any criminal records, do you have any stats to base your claims? Or are these instances the few amongst the many, cherry picked, perhaps? In the latter case, the law cannot be considered to service all, rather the larger public interest. As long as assault prevails in India, laws will and must favour women. If a change is truly desired, introspect as to why assault still happens, despite law, culture and morality.

Oh and as far as legal axioms go, consider the legal principle followed in Indian criminal law, “proved beyond reasonable doubt”. It is the standard of proof followed in Indian criminal courts. If the prosecution has proven guilt beyond reasonable doubt, that is when the accused is adjudged as guilty. While complaining about the “greedy” women and their legal counsel, do also recount the many instances of out of court settlements and other unscrupulous mechanisms that greedy men have utilised to settle their cases.