Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Two Rape Accused

New Delhi: Referring to a woman’s specific allegations of rape, physical and mental torture against two men, a Delhi court has refused them anticipatory bail.

Dealing with their contentions that the woman had filed a false case owing to her employer’s feud with the men, additional sessions judge Ravinder Bedi noted, “The complainant being one of such employees and a lady is not expected to expose herself to ridicule and to be defamed at the cost of putting her chastity and reputation in jeopardy.”

The order also took note of the complainant’s version indicating “very direct and serious allegations” against the two men that required investigation, including custodial interrogation.

“In case, the applicants are given the concession of bail, police would be deprived of interrogating and effectively investigating the matter of heinous offence of gang rape and the same would adversely affect and weaken the case of prosecution, which to my mind, is not legally permissible,” the judge noted.

In the complaint filed on April 15, 2021, the woman alleged that both men were known to her employer and frequently visited the office and told her that they could get her a better paying job. On one occasion on finding her boss wasn’t around, they sexually assaulted her, she alleged. The woman, owing to her reputation, did not report the incident but when they assaulted her for the second time, she decided to take action.

The counsel appearing for the two men denied the allegations arguing that the case was the result of a legal proceeding initiated by the company of the applicants against the woman’s employer. It was argued that the applicants did not even know the complainant. The FIR was stated to be full of lies, filed on the basis of the woman’s motive to defame the applicants. The counsel pointed out the company’s office, which was the place of incident, bustled with customers all the time and the alleged gangrape would have not gone unnoticed by other employees or customers.

Without getting into the merits of the case, the court held that prima facie the argument that the FIR was a result of the legal battle did not “seem to hold water” for it had come on record that the company had over 200 employees and the woman being one such employee wouldn’t subject herself to ridicule.


Stay updated with the latest news on Times of India. Don't miss daily games like Crossword, Sudoku, and Mini Crossword.