Prayagraj: Granting bail to a rape accused, the Allahabad high court, in its recent order, has said that the ‘victim herself invited trouble and was also responsible for the alleged act’.
As per the submission of the survivor, a postgraduate student, she went to a bar in Delhi’s Hauz Khas along with her female friends. Some other male acquaintances of her friends and the accused met them at the bar. After they got intoxicated, the accused took her to his relative’s place in Gurgaon and raped her twice. She lodged an FIR in Gautam Budh Nagar and the accused was arrested in December 2024. He later moved the high court for bail.
Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh in his order dated March 11 said: “This court is of the view that even if the allegation of the victim is accepted as true, then it can also be concluded that she herself invited trouble and was also responsible for the same. Similar stand has been taken by the victim in her statement. In her medical examination, her hymen was found torn but doctor did not give any opinion about the sexual assault.”
The court also added that as an MA student, the victim was competent enough to understand the “morality and significance of her act” as disclosed by her in the FIR.
As per the victim’s version, she, along with some female friends went to a bar in Delhi where she met the accused and some other male friends. They consumed alcohol at the bar, due to which she became intoxicated.
She further claimed that she remained at the bar until around 3:00 am and during this time, the accused kept on insisting that she should accompany him to his house. As she was in need of support due to her condition, she agreed to go with him to rest, her submission said.
However, she further alleged, the accused touched her inappropriately on the way and instead of taking her to his residence in Noida, as she had expected, he took her to a relative’s flat in Gurgaon, where he raped her.
An FIR in this connection was lodged by the survivor on Sept 23,2024 at in Gautam Budh Nagar.
Seeking bail in the case, the accused moved the high court, wherein his counsel argued that even if all the allegations are taken to be true, it is not a case of rape but may be a case of consensual relationship between two persons.
It was also argued that the accused has been languishing in jail since December 2024, despite having no criminal history, and that if he was released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the early disposal of the case.
On the other hand, the additional government advocate for the state opposed the bail plea in the light of the FIR, but he did dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant.
Against the backdrop of these submissions, the court granted bail to the accused applicant. “Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.”