AIIMS professor accused of raping a colleague has been granted anticipatory bail by the court. The decision follows the filing of a chargesheet without arrest and deemed custodial interrogation unnecessary. Conflicting claims about a “matrimonial dispute” were noted, leaving the determination of marriage legitimacy for trial. The court imposed conditions on bail, including a Rs 25,000 bond, restrictions on contact with the complainant, and regular court appearances.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
New Delhi, February 17, 2024 : The Delhi court awarded anticipatory bail to a 54-year-old doctor from the prestigious All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), embroiled in allegations of raping a colleague under the pretext of marriage. This decision, rendered by Additional Sessions Judge Ravindra Kumar Pandey, has ignited discussions on the legal nuances and ethical considerations surrounding cases of this nature.
The decision was made by Additional Sessions Judge Ravindra Kumar Pandey, who considered the complexities surrounding the allegations against the neurosurgery professor. The Delhi Police had lodged a case incorporating severe charges, including rape, unnatural offences, causing miscarriage without the woman’s consent, and criminal intimidation.
ALSO READ: Man Sentenced 10-Year Jail Term for 2015 Rape of Minor Girl in Sonbhadra, UP
Judge Pandey’s observations were pivotal in the granting of bail.
He noted–
“after the completion of the investigation, a chargesheet was filed against the doctor who was never arrested.” This point was crucial, as the Investigating Officer (IO) indicated that “the accused’s custodial interrogation was not required.”
The court’s deliberation also highlighted the conflicting narratives at the heart of this case.
ALSO READ: Delhi Court Denies Bail for Sharjeel Imam in Sedition and UAPA Case Over Anti-CAA Speeches
“The accused has claimed that the FIR and complaint were lodged due to a matrimonial dispute between the complainant and accused. On the other hand, the complainant claimed that the offence against the complainant was committed on the pretext of false marriage,”
-the court elaborated.
This dichotomy sets the stage for a trial that seeks to unravel the truth behind these allegations, with the court stating,
“It is a matter of trial as to whether both the parties were married to each other, which is to be decided by the competent court having jurisdiction to decide the issue.”
In granting bail, the court weighed the “overall facts and circumstances of the case,” the arguments presented, and the fact that a chargesheet was filed without an arrest. It also referenced guidelines from a Supreme Court case in 2022, concluding that the accused was entitled to anticipatory bail.
The conditions set forth for the bail are stringent, aimed at ensuring a fair trial and the integrity of the investigation. The accused is required to furnish a bail bond and surety bond of Rs 25,000 each. Moreover, he is expressly forbidden from contacting the complainant, fellow doctor, or witnesses, tampering with evidence, and is mandated to regularly appear before the court.
ALSO READ: CBI Petitions Mumbai Court to Halt Netflix Broadcast of Indrani Mukerjea Documentary Series
This case took a new turn when, last month, a metropolitan magistrate’s court summoned the accused doctor to appear on February 26, after finding the evidence on record “prima facie sufficient” to proceed with the case. This development came shortly before an organization advocating for women’s rights called for the doctor’s suspension and arrest, intensifying the scrutiny on this case.
The allegations against the doctor are grave, involving a “sham marriage” and forced abortion, according to the FIR. This case not only highlights the legal challenges in dealing with accusations of such a serious nature but also underscores the societal implications of trust and safety within professional environments.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
