Rape case mediation: HC recalls order, bail of convict cancelled

Despite the rape victim herself slammed the Madras High Court mediation directive, the state legal services authority sent the letter to the victim to appear for mediation on July 13.

Written by Arun Janardhanan | Chennai | Updated: July 12, 2015 5:16 am
chennai rape, Madras rape, rape mediation, 2008 rape case, chennai 2008 rape, chennai 2008 minor rape, rape mediation ruling, chennai news, india news, indian express The 21-year-old rape victim with her daughter at her village near Virudhachalam in Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu. (Source: Express Photo by Arun Janardhanan)

The Madras High Court on Friday recalled the controversial order referring a minor’s rape case for mediation and cancelled the interim bail given to the rape convict in view of the Supreme Court order dated July 1 that held that mediation and compromise should not be an option in rape cases in the ‘state of Madhya Pradesh vs Madanlal case.’

Recalling the order, Justice P Devadass, the same judge who referred it for mediation, has also stopped the mediation procedures, and asked the convict to surrender on July 13, the date that actually was set for mediation earlier.

Share This Article
Related Article

“This court by its order dated June 18, directed the parties to go for mediation. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in state of Madhya Pradesh vs Madanlal, dated July 1, the said order of this court directing the parties to go for mediation is recalled. Consequently, the interim bail granted to Mohan is cancelled. The officer-in-charge, mediation centre attached to this court shall stop the parties from attending the mediation. Registrar (judicial) of this court shall ensure compliance of this order,” the order said.

Also read:  ‘One day, I’ll tell my girl her father was a rapist’

On Monday, The Indian Express reported that despite the rape victim herself slammed the Madras High Court mediation directive, the state legal services authority sent the letter to the victim to appear for mediation on July 13. However, the victim had decided to reject the offer. Besides protests from senior jurists, over 100 lawyers in the HC also had written to the Chief Justice to re-allot the portfolio of Justice Devadass with immediate effect. “Therefore it is inappropriate that the judiciary should assume the role of the quintessential patriarch and condemn the survivor to the fate of accepting the rapist’s hand in marriage as a peace offering…In allowing this decision, the High Court is effacing the autonomy and agency of a single woman, her right to a partner of her choice and to be the authority where her body is concerned. In allowing this decision, justice has been bypassed,” said the petition.

Video: (app users click here to watch)

The victim, now a 22-year-old unwed mother of a six-year-old girl, told The Indian Express in an interview that if she goes for a settlement, one day her child will question her for taking up his offer of money. “If I agree to his offer, may be we will get something. But what will be her future… being brought up as the daughter of a rapist. Even if her father is a rapist, she will realise one day that her mother struggled for her. She will learn it the hard way. That will make her a good woman,” she said.

“Did the judge ever think how I suffered all these years? He knew I had a baby from that rape. And now this single order of his wants me to go through that suffering again,” she said.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. N
    Jul 11, 2015 at 2:14 pm
    Who fits in best choice from this govt.?
    1. Mohammad Bin Tughlaq
      Jul 11, 2015 at 5:35 pm
      'It is high time we take a look at 'Crime and Punishment' scene. Not only in India but world over.(Sharia may be an exception in this regard). When a crime is committed, the society looks it as crime against it and not at the individual who is the victim of that action. And so the punishment meted out is based on the way the society looks at the crime. If someone kills someone else, for the society that action is 'one individual has murdered another individual, both being members of the society'. Society then goes by the eye for eye logic and orders the killing of the killer. The victim is no more and whatever happens he is not bothered. But there are others who are intimately connected with the victim. He may have a wife, children, parents, unmarried sisters, brothers studying and many who all could have been depending upon his earnings. What happens to them? Who takes care of them? Does the society takes care of such dependent people? Will not they be made desutes? Does the avenging the murder by hanging the killer mitigate their sufferings in any way? They may get a momentary satisfaction that the murder has been avenged but a stark future glares at them. So is not better if we adopt the 'blood money' provision in Sharia? Whosoever has died has died. Nothing is going to bring him or her back to life. Is it not better to give some relief to those whose life will be just misery if no help comes in? Whatever shortcomings might be there in Islamic laws this one is really a well thought out law. You cannot live on mental satisfaction but only with something which will fill your belly and meet to your other needs. So in this case what the Honourable Judge Devad has first observed is very relevant. The first victim is not the 15 year old mother but the child born out of the crime. The mother is only the second victim. What crime the child has done that its w life she has to suffer the tag 'b*stard'? And probably the mother and child might be on the streets begging as we see so many young girls with a baby in the cloth sling and another slightly older holding the hand. Such a fate should not fall upon the innocent victims. So if a proper settlement is made and if the perpetrator is given the choice of marrying the girl and looking after the girl and child, it is far better than punishing for a jail term of 7 or 10 years afterwards he will come out and marry and settle down while the victims will be begging on the streets. We should look once again the law of 'eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth' and find a better solution.
      1. A
        Jul 11, 2015 at 9:12 pm
        I am in total agreement with u n the judge. Maybe that naive rural girl is exploited by some publicity seeking ngo or opinionated fem movement people who spk in bombastic jargon without relating to the realities highlighted in the post.
        1. Sunil Gupte
          Jul 11, 2015 at 3:40 pm
          Most shameful and disgusting of the judgements. For such monumental error of judgement, the judge should resign now, if not be sacked. The state should adequately compensate the poor victim and rehabilitate her and her daughter.
          1. K
            Jul 11, 2015 at 3:41 pm
            Why this judge is still being allowed to preside the court? He doesnt even have basic intellect to be a judge. Also why media is publishing even these pictures? If the mindset of judges is this what would be the mindset of the people around them?
            1. Load More Comments