The Allahabad High Court has granted a bail to a 26-year-old man accused of rape and cyber harassment whilst imposing the condition that he marries the 23-year-old survivor within three months of his release. The order was issued on February 20 by Justice Krishan Pahal.
The accused, a resident from Sikar, Rajasthan, and the survivor both attended the same coaching center in 2024 for preparing for the police recruitment examinations. According to the prosecution, the accused allegedly exploited the survivor by promising assistance in securing a position in the Uttar Pradesh Police Department. He purportedly coerced her into a physical relationship under this pretense and extorted ₹9 lakh by threatening to release intimate videos online.
In May 2024, the survivor’s family filed a police complaint alleging repeated sexual assaults since February of that year.
An FIR was henceforth registered under sections 376, 506 of IPC and under the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The accused was apprehended on 21 September. He remained in custody after the rejection of his bail plea by the Agra sessions court on 3rd October, 2024.
The Accused Pleads in the High Court
The defense counsel argued that the allegations were fabricated and brought to notice a four-month delay in filing the FIR. The defense also pleaded the accused’s willingness to marry the survivor.
Justice Pahal noted that the prosecution failed to present exceptional circumstances that would justify denying bail.
The court remarked that the primary purpose of bail is to ensure the accused’s attendance at trial and that there was no evidence that suggested that he would flee or intimidate witnesses.Propounding on the legal principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception, the court reiterated the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
However, the court’s decision, to make marriage a necessary condition for the bail within three months after the accused is released, has sparked discussions about the appropriateness of such judicial directives.
The court’s intent may well be to provide a form of restitution or social remedy, critics argue that mandating marriage in such instances could evidently undermine the survivor’s autonomy and potentially subject her to further harm.
To add further, the court’s order did not specify whether the survivor’s consent was obtained or considered in imposing this condition.
The instance is not the first one
This is not a one of its kind instance where the Allahabad High Court has sufficed bail conditions to marriage between the accused and the survivor.
In October 2023, the court granted bail to a man accused of raping a minor after he assured the court of his intention to marry the victim. The accused also agreed to take care of their newborn child.
The court then directed the accused to marry the survivor and provide financial support for the child in the form of a fixed deposit of ₹2 lakh in the child’s name within six months of release.
About Author
Tanishq, a law student at the Department of Legal Studies and Research, Barkatullah Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal, is a budding legal writer with a sharp eye for evolving legal landscapes. Passionate about Intellectual Property Rights, Constitutional Law, and Women and Child Safety Laws, Tanishq actively explores contemporary legal nuances through writing and research.