"Victim Being Educated Not Immune To Cheating": Delhi HC Denies Anticipatory Bail To Navy Officer Accused Of Raping Woman On Pretext Of Marriage

Observing that a victim being an educated lady is not immune to cheating, the Delhi High Court has denied anticipatory bail to an Indian Navy Officer accused of raping a woman on pretext of marrying her.

Justice Yogesh Khanna observed:

"No doubt, the victim is an educated lady, but is an educated person immune to cheating. The answer would be "no". The facts do show the petitioner and prosecutrix did have such relations to kindle a hope in the prosecutrix that the petitioner shall marry her at all costs. It was not illogical for her to think so."

"No doubt, the petitioner is a senior officer in Indian Navy, hence was required to show a more responsible behavior than the prosecutrix. Can he be allowed to play with her dignity on the pretext he cohabited with her just for fun and later claim she is extorting money from him. Such allegations if not backed with proof are rather insulting."

The Court was dealing with an anticipatory bail plea filed by the officer in a case registered against him under sec. 376, 328 and 506 of IPC.

According to the prosecutrix, the accused committed sexual intercourse with her in December, 2019 at Delhi by taking her out for dinner. It was alleged that he mixed sedatives in her drink after which he took her to his room wherein she was allegedly raped.

She alleged that from December 2019 to January 2020, he committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marriage. When she threatened the accused of lodging a complaint, he allegedly told her that he had her nude photographs and video recordings and he shall upload the same on internet thereby ruining her career.

Denying any physical relations with her, it was the case of the petitioner that the prosecutrix started calling and insisting him to marry her but he did not echo her sentiment. 

It was also his case that she made repeated demands to transfer money to her bank account, but he showed his inability to do so.

The petitioner also submitted that both of them were empowered persons, the prosecutrix being an highly educated lady, both were on talking terms for the 1½ years from the date of first alleged incident. Submitting so, it was contended that she never filed any FIR between December 2019 to January 2020, thus there was a considerable delay.

"The argument, the alleged sexual intercourse, even otherwise, was in December 2019 or January 2020 and hence for 1½ year she never filed any complaint and thus was privy to the act is not acceptable because the petitioner allegedly repeated the act even in March, 2021 at Kannur, Kerala without giving any indication to prosecutrix that he is marrying another girl. Rather, per allegations the prosecutrix on 15.06.2021 was shocked to hear about his marriage and she filed the complaint on 19.06.2021, hence it cannot be said there was much delay in lodging of the FIR," the Court said.

The Court also reiterated that delay in lodging the FIR cannot be used as a "ritualistic formula" for doubting the prosecution case and discarding the same. 

"The allegation she is doing all this for money rather inflicts more pain to her injury. The investigation so far reveal he is trying to influence his subordinates and has destroyed / deleted the evidence against him," the Court said.

Perusing the Sessions Court order denying bail to the petitioner, the Court said it showed that he deleted the electronic record in the form of chats, text messages and facebook messages/chats exchanged between them.

"This act of the petitioner rather reflects his intention to cover up his wrongs by erasing the relevant electronic record/data, which would otherwise had given a true picture of the facts," the Court observed.

Considering the facts of the case, the plea was accordingly dismissed.

Title: CDR. KALESH MOHANAN v. STATE

Click Here To Read Order