'Serious Offence': Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Raping Physically Challenged Woman On False Promise To Marry
The Allahabad High Court recently denied bail to a man accused of raping a physically challenged woman on the pretext of marriage and thereafter, refusing to marry her. “Such criminal tendencies growing in the society must be nipped in the bud to convey a strong message to the culprits in the society,” the bench of Justice Saroj Yadav observed as it called the alleged...
The Allahabad High Court recently denied bail to a man accused of raping a physically challenged woman on the pretext of marriage and thereafter, refusing to marry her.
“Such criminal tendencies growing in the society must be nipped in the bud to convey a strong message to the culprits in the society,” the bench of Justice Saroj Yadav observed as it called the alleged offence, a ‘serious’ one.
It may be noted the accused-Pintu Kumar has been accused of luring the victim, a physically challenged lady having no legs, to have sex with him by extending a false promise to marry her.
However, later on, he did not marry her, and hence, an FIR was lodged by the victim, pursuant to which, he was booked under Sections 376 and 506 IPC and was arrested.
The accused, who is languishing in jail since May 6, 2023, earlier moved a bail plea before the trial court, which was rejected, and hence, he moved the instant plea before the High Court.
His counsel argued that the victim aged about 25 years is a consenting party as she herself stated in the FIR that she was in a relationship with the accused applicant.
In support of his contention, the counsel for the accused applicant placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court passed in the cases of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Versus The State of Maharashtra and Others, AIR 2019 SC 4010 and Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar Versus The State of Maharashtra and Others, AIR 2019 SC 327.
On the other hand, the state counsel argued that the accused exploited the victim on the pretext of marriage and finally refused to marry her.
It was also submitted that in her statements recorded under Sections 161 & 164 CrPC, the victim had fully supported the prosecution version, therefore, the accused applicant should not be enlarged on bail.
Taking into account the disability of the victim, the Court opined that the case law cited by the counsel for the accused applicant was of no help to the accused applicant.
Consequently, the Court refused to grant him bail by making the following observations:
“It transpires from the rejection order passed by the trial Court, the victim is a handicapped lady and the accused applicant exploited the victim on the pretext of marriage. It is a serious offence against the society, hence the applicant is not entitled to any indulgence.”
Case title - Pintu Kumar vs. State of U.P [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37170 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 8