JNU rape case: Charges false, result of political rivalry, says Anmol Ratan

On Tuesday, when Ratan’s anticipatory bail application (ABA) was moved, his advocate Rajiv Mohan asserted that the woman and his client knew each other. Arguing briefly on the plea, the lawyer told the court of Additional Sessions Judge Amit Bansal it was the complainant who had gone to the Brahmaputra hostel.

Mohan argued that the complaint was the result of a “political rivalry” as Ratan belonged to AISA, while the complainant was a part of the Collective and they had “ideological differences”. He also cited the forthcoming JNU elections as one of the reasons, given the “political rivalry” between the two outfits.

The court, however, refused to grant Ratan any protection from arrest and adjourned the matter to August 27, when it will hear the arguments on the anticipatory bail. Ratan has been booked under Sections 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC.

Later in the day, the woman approached the court of Metropolitan Magistrate Snigdha Sarvaria to record her statement under a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure. While there was some confusion on whether the woman’s statement was recorded, sources told The Indian Express that she recorded part of her statement Tuesday and will continue to do so Wednesday.

Given the sensitivity and gravity of the case, police officials associated with the case remained tight-lipped. Taking serious note of the incident Sunday evening, AISA had earlier expelled Ratan from its primary membership. In a statement, the students’ organisation said, “We will reflect on and deal with this issue with all the firmness it deserves.”