No Self-Respecting Woman Would Normally Concoct Rape Allegations Putting Her Character, Marriage Prospects On Stake: Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Dismissing the bail plea of a man accused of raping a 10-year-old daughter of his neighbour, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently observed that normally no woman would put her character at risk by falsely implicating a man for rape."Since rape leaves a permanent scar on the most cherished possession of woman and serious psychological impact on the victim and her family,...
Dismissing the bail plea of a man accused of raping a 10-year-old daughter of his neighbour, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently observed that normally no woman would put her character at risk by falsely implicating a man for rape.
"Since rape leaves a permanent scar on the most cherished possession of woman and serious psychological impact on the victim and her family, the prosecutrix as in the case in hand, would not therefore, have concocted story of rape against petitioner/accused to falsely implicate him by putting her honour, character, reputation and her future marriage prospects on stake in the society. Ordinarily, the offence of rape is grave by its nature," bench of Justice Mohan Lal observed.
The accused-applicant had submitted that he had been arrested on June 24th 2021, six days from the date of alleged occurrence of the offence and in fact the dispute is civil in nature in regard to a passage towards their house of which does not exist in revenue records.
The accused further contended that he had been illegally kept in police custody and is now languishing in District Jail since then. Being the only earning members of the family and due to his arrest, the family members are at the verge of starvation, the petitioner added.
The case of the prosecution was that the victim was raped by the accused while she was filling water from a tap in her locality. He had threatened her not to disclose the same to anyone. However, she had narrated her ordeal to her parents a week after the incident, following which the accused was arrested. Subsequently he was charged under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) Act.
At the very outset, the Court observed that rape leaves a permanent scar on the most cherished possession of a woman and has a serious psychological impact on the victim and her family.
"Rape is the most hated crime in the society which leaves a scar upon the most cherished personality of a victim, and, therefore, no self-respecting woman would normally concoct a story of rape," the bench underscored.
Ruling out leniency in matters involving sexual offences the bench said doing so is not only undesirable, but is also against public interest.
"Courts cannot loose sight of the fact that crime of violence upon women and minor children are on increase and therefore the perpetrators of the crime must be dealt with iron hands.Showing leniency in such matters would be really a case of misplaced sympathy. The act of accused is not only shocking, but outrageous in contours. Granting of bail to him would lead to the danger of the course of justice being thwarted..."
Such an act leaves an indelible scar on the victim's dignity, chastity, honour and reputation in society, and granting the accused bail would shake the confidence of the people at large, the judge opined.
Elaborating further on the subject the bench observed that the prosecutrix would not therefore, have concocted story of rape against the accused to falsely implicate him by putting her honour, character, reputation and her future marriage prospects on stake in the society.
Pointing out to the fact that the offences alleged against the accused would attract imprisonment till the remainder of his natural life or a jail term not less than 20 years, the bench recorded,
"More severe the punishment is, more are the chances of the accused to abscond during to the trial or flee from justice if released on bail. There is every danger that he will abscond or flee during trial if enlarged on bail,"
Terming the act of the petitioner dastardly, diabolic and fiendish in nature, the court said that the manner in which the crime has been committed by the petitioner/accused upon the prosecutrix, sends the shivers down to the spines of everybody who is concerned with the administration of justice and maintenance of rule of law.
Observing that this being a fit case where bail ought not be granted as the petitioner/accused as he has failed to carve out a strong case for bail in his favour, the court dismissed the bail application as being utterly misconceived.
Case Title: Sunil Kumar Vs UT of J&K
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 75