'You Kept Silent For 2 Years?': Supreme Court Dismisses Complainant's Challenge Against Pre-Arrest Bail To Rape-Accused

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a special leave petition filed against a Madhya Pradesh High Court's order granting anticipatory bail to a man accused of raping a 23 year old woman.

During the hearing, Advocate Prashant Shukla submitted before a bench comprising the Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Hima Kohli that there were clear allegations in the FIR that the accused took nude pictures of the woman.

"You're claiming that he sexually exploited you for two years and you kept silent for two years?", Justice Hima Kohli asked the counsel.

"It was on pretext of marriage, he was 11 years elder to me, he is a central government employee", Mr Shukla said

"Sorry. Dismissed", the Bench said.

In the petition, the petitioner had argued that the High Court has erred in observing that "despite offence for two years of her sexual exploitation, she has not complained to anyone when accused refused to marry, she has lodged a report" thereby enlarging him out on bail.

Responding to the High Court's observation, the petitioner has submitted that she remained silent as the accused had captured her nude photographs and videos after forcibly raping her in a state of intoxication by giving her adulterated coffee.

The High Court while granting anticipatory bail to the accused had recorded that the "prosecutrix is aged about 23 years of age, despite offence for two years her sexual exploitation, she has not complained to any one when applicant-accused refused to marry, she has lodged a report, applicant/accused is a Central Govt. employee, in these facts and circumstances, this Court deems to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail, therefore, the application is allowed."

According to the special leave petition filed through Advocate Divyesh Pratap Singh, the accused was acquainted with the petitioner woman since earlier, and took her to his flat where after adulterating her coffee, he forcibly raped her in a state of intoxication.

It has been alleged that the accused also took nude photographs and videos of her and threatened to circulate them and defame her if she disclosed the incident to anyone.

According to the petitioner, accused further told her that if she would co- operate with him then he would  marry her and save her reputation. For 2 years he kept on raping her under the pretext of marriage and and when she used to plead about the marriage, he kept on postponing the same and started avoiding her.

The petitioner had argued that the High Court erred in granting anticipatory bail to the accused without appreciating the fact that charge-sheet has not been filed yet and he still has intimate photographs and videos of the Petitioner.