Sessions Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail To Rakhi Sawant Booked For Allegedly Circulating Her Estranged Husband's Sexually Explicit Video

A Dindoshi Court in Mumbai has rejected the anticipatory bail application of model-actress Rakhi Sawant in the case related to alleged possession and circulation of sexually explicit videos of herself with her estranged husband Adil Durrani.

The court distinguished between section 67 and section 67A of the Information Technology Act. It held that section 67 deals with publishing/transmitting obscene material, section 67A deals with publishing/transmitting sexually explicit material.

Additional Sessions Judge Shrikant Y. Bhosale observed “the material is not only of obscene but it is sexually explicit material.” The court also cited Sawant's criminal antecedents as she was booked for a similar offence in the past.

The actor had filed the anticipatory bail application apprehending arrest in the case registered against her at Amboli police station under sections 500, 34 of IPC and Section 67A of Information Technology Act.

The police alleged Rakhi Sawant had displayed explicit videos featuring her estranged husband on her mobile phone during a TV show aired on August 25, 2023. She had also allegedly shared these videos on WhatsApp groups and forwarded the links. The estranged husband had filed a complaint regarding this on October 18.

During the bail arguments, Sawant's lawyer contended that the estranged husband had himself recorded the videos in question. Therefore, he should also be a co-accused in the case if at all. He also argued that while the videos were displayed on the show, the content was not actually visible. The defence lawyer cited some High Court rulings to distinguish between section 67 and 67A of IT Act. He stated that section 67A applies only if sexually explicit material is transmitted online, which was not the case here.

However, the prosecution opposed the bail plea stating that Sawant had transmitted sexually explicit material featuring the complainant. It was pointed out that Sawant already faced another similar case in the past where her anticipatory bail was rejected.

After hearing both sides and examining the material on record, the Court held that the videos allegedly published by Sawant were not just obscene but sexually explicit in nature. It also noted that she had a criminal background in a similar case.

The court further dismissed Sawant's argument that she had cooperated in the investigation. “However, the investigation officer vide his say, has raised one of the objection  that the  devices used for transmission and storage  of  the disputed material, needs to be seized and admittedly the said devices are still with the applicant.”

Considering the allegations and facts of the case, the Court ruled that this was not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. The interim protection from arrest already enjoyed by Sawant will continue till January 11, giving her time to move the High Court.

“In light of the above facts I find that the case laws cited on behalf of the applicant are not useful to grant relief in favour of the applicant. After all the relief of anticipatory bail is within the discretion of the Court and the Court has to grant or to refuse the said relief considering the facts and circumstances of a particular case. Having discussed the allegations and the facts and circumstances of the case I am of the view that this is not a fit case to grant relief of anticipatory bail."

The court, however, granted a stay on the order till January, 11 to enable Sawant to approach the High Court.

Appearances - Adv Mr. Khan Deshmukh for the Applicant/Accused.

APP Mr. R. C. Savle for the State.

Adv Mr. Suhail. I. Sharif for the intervenor. 

Click Here To Read/Download Order