Chinmayee sets the ball rolling on the BNP site:
She got very drunk one night and woke up to realise that she had sex with someone in a corridor and could not remember whether or not she had consented to it. The man in question says she was aware they were having intercourse. She says she wasn't. So she files a case and the judge says - drunken consent is still consent. And therefore, rules that she was not raped.
The case has sparked off a tizzy.
What's your take? Rape? Drunken sex? Fair judgement?
Debate it on the BNP blog.
