"He Appears To Be Pervert, Would Make Life Of Young Friends Of Opposite Gender Miserable": HP High Court Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Raping Minor

The Bench of Justice Anoop Chitkara further remarked,

"The accused appears to be pervert and, as such, there is no question to grant the bail to the Accused."

Allegations against the Accused

As per the statement of the minor victim girl, on July 4, 2020, when she and her friend Sandeep were walking 20-30 meters below the road to have gossips, 6 boys came there and one of them (A-2), who knew the victim, slapped both of them.

After that they forced the victim to undress and when they made the victim to remove her clothes, then A-1 started making her nude video. In the meantime, other boys were continuously beating Sandeep Kumar and A-1 caught hold of the victim from her arm and took her to the bushes, where she was made to remove her clothes and he committed rape upon her.

Allegedly, when she resisted, then he slapped her, in the meanwhile, other boys had caught hold of Sandeep, so that he could not save her and while leaving, they threatened the victim not to reveal this incident to anyone, otherwise they would make her video viral.

However, after some days, she came to know that they had uploaded the video and then she informed the police, which led to the registration of the instant FIR.

Submissions made before the Court

The Counsel for the petitioner contended that his incarceration before the proof of guilt would cause grave injustice to the petitioner and family.

On the contrary, the State contended that the Police have collected sufficient evidence against the bail petitioner and that the crime was heinous, the accused was a risk to law-abiding people, and bail might send a wrong message to society.

Court's order

Underlining that the accused took advantage of her being with the male friend and the main accused forced himself upon her and they not only did that, they also made a video and made it viral, the Court, further added

"Given the age of the accused to be just 22 years, it shall be open to the accused/petitioner to file fresh bail application in the changed circumstances or in case the trial is delayed."

Lastly, noting that in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner failed to make out a case for bail, the petition was dismissed with liberty to file a new bail application.

In related news, observing that"NO MEANS NO- The simplest of sentences have become the most difficult for some men to understand," the Himachal Pradesh High Court on Wednesday rejected the bail application filed by a man accused of raping a 17-year-old minor.

The single-judge bench comprising of Justice Anoop Chitkara observed thus:

"No does not mean yes, it does not mean that the girl is shy, it does not mean that the girl is asking a man to convince her, it does not mean that he has to keep pursuing her. The word NO doesn't need any further explanation or justification. It ends there, and the man has to stop. Be that as it may, the victim, in this case, said no to the accused when he started touching her, but he continued. It nowhere implies consent, or zeal and desire to explore and feel each other in romantic love."

The Court reasoned further noted that the victim revealed the unfortunate incident to her mother "prima facie points towards the genuineness of the incident."

"She would have kept it discreet because, as per her version, no one had noticed them. If the sexual act was with her will, she would not have told anyone about the same and tried to conceal the same. The victim voluntarily narrated the incident to her mother, prima facie points towards the genuineness of the incident. It would be correct to say that it was courageous for the victim girl to talk about the unfortunate incident to her mother and later come forward and report the same with the police." The Court observed at the outset.

Case title - Rohit Kumar v. State of H.P.

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order