The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to a home tutor in an alleged rape case, noting the two-year relationship between the petitioner and the complainant before the FIR. Despite blackmail allegations, the charges have not been substantiated, and the FSL report is pending.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a home tutor involved in an alleged rape case. The court’s decision came after considering various aspects of the case, including the prolonged physical relationship between the petitioner and the prosecutrix, which continued for about two years before the First Information Report (FIR) was lodged.
The accused, who is ten years younger than the complainant, has been cooperative during the investigation, and a chargesheet has already been submitted. Despite allegations of blackmail and threats to disseminate the complainant’s photographs, these claims have not been substantiated as the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report is still pending.
“Considering all the facts and circumstances, and without commenting on the merits of the case, if the petitioner is arrested, they should be granted bail upon providing a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with a similar amount in surety.”
-stated the bench of Anoop Kumar Mendiratta.
Background of the Case
The FIR was lodged based on a statement from a woman who claimed that she had hired the accused as a home tutor for her children. She alleged that the petitioner expressed his intention to marry her and, based on this assurance, established physical relations with her against her will. Additionally, she claimed to have paid Rs 7 lakh to the petitioner for his MBA completion. However, the accused married someone else in 2021.
Advocates Ravi Drall and Aditi Drall, representing the accused, argued that the relationship between the petitioner and the prosecutrix was consensual, emphasizing that both parties had known each other closely for many years. Drall highlighted that prior to the registration of the current FIR, the prosecutrix had visited the petitioner’s house and created a scene, leading to a complaint under sections 323/452/506/34 of the IPC being filed with the police.
Upon examining the accused’s mobile phone, no photographs or videos of the complainant were discovered. The mobile phone has been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for further analysis. The court noted that the complainant, a widow and a professional teacher, was an adult fully aware of her actions and their implications.
On the other hand, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) for the State, along with the prosecutrix, opposed the bail application. They contended that the relationship was established under the false promise of marriage and that the petitioner had threatened to make the prosecutrix’s photographs viral.
The APP also informed the court that the petitioner’s mobile phone had been sent for FSL examination, and the report to corroborate the allegations was still awaited.
