The Delhi High Court refused interim protection to a lawyer accused of raping a fellow advocate, questioning the credibility of a sudden settlement. The Court said the parties had made a “mockery of the judicial system” by involving judicial officers and levelling counter-allegations.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court denied interim protection from arrest to a lawyer accused of raping a 27-year-old advocate and attempting to influence the matter through judicial officers. The court refused relief even after the parties claimed to have settled.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani presided over the case, expressing concern over the murky nature of the allegations. The court noted that both the accused and the complainant had made serious accusations against each other, involving judicial officers, and then attempted to settle the matter.
“We don’t know how deep this matter has gone, and we do not know what the truth is. With every passing phase, it gets more murky… I have seen some video recordings involving judges,”
said Justice Bhambhani.
As a result, the court denied interim protection from arrest to the accused lawyer but clarified that the petitioner could still explore remedies such as applying for regular bail.
The case came into public focus after the Delhi High Court suspended judicial officer Sanjeev Kumar Singh and initiated a disciplinary probe against another district judge. This followed allegations that the officers pressured the complainant to withdraw the complaint against the lawyer.
The 27-year-old complainant accused the 51-year-old lawyer, a widower, of:
- Forcing himself on her repeatedly over five years under the pretext of marriage
- Causing her to become pregnant earlier this year
- Taking her for an abortion and assaulting her later at a country club in South Delhi
CCTV footage reportedly captured parts of the altercation, which added gravity to the allegations.
Senior Advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari, representing the accused, argued that:
- His client never approached judicial officers to influence the case
- The accusations stemmed from a personal dispute
- All allegations, including claims of extortion made by the accused, have now been withdrawn
Despite these claims, the Delhi High Court questioned the voluntary nature of the settlement, given the involvement of counsel and judicial officers in alleged threats.
“Counsel threatens, the judges threaten, and then you are saying it is consensual,” the court remarked.
The court further noted that the previous anticipatory bail granted to the accused had been cancelled after the complainant challenged it.