‘Friendship not a licence to rape’: Delhi HC refuses anticipatory bail to man accused of raping minor

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed the application of the man in the case lodged under Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, noting that the accused had still not joined the investigation, despite his anticipatory bail plea having been either withdrawn or rejected on four occasions in the past.

delhi hcThe victim, however, had not initially disclosed about the sexual assault “out of fear”, as recorded by the court, an the FIR was lodged 11 days later.

Refusing to grant anticipatory bail to a man accused of raping a minor, the Delhi High Court last week observed that “friendship does not give any licence to rape repeatedly”.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed the application of the man in the case lodged under Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, noting that the accused had still not joined the investigation, despite his anticipatory bail plea having been either withdrawn or rejected on four occasions in the past.

Refusing to accept the contention by the accused that he and the minor complainant were friends and therefore, it could be a case of consensual relationship, Justice Sharma recorded, “Even if the parties concerned were friends, friendship does not give any licence to the applicant to rape the victim repeatedly, confine her in his friend’s house and beat her mercilessly, as prima facie disclosed by the complainant in her statement recorded…”

Story continues below this ad

The minor, who purportedly befriended the accused man on Instagram, was allegedly taken to the house of a friend of the accused where the accused beat her and forcibly raped her several times.

The victim, however, had not initially disclosed about the sexual assault “out of fear”, as recorded by the court, an the FIR was lodged 11 days later.

Rejecting the accused’s argument that there was a delay in registering the offence, the court further recorded, “Quite naturally, it was owing to the fear and trauma of the said incident that the complainant had initially resisted from disclosing about the incident to her parents, until…when she mustered courage to inform her mother…This court is of the view that being a minor, she was under trauma and a sense of shame that had precluded her from disclosing anything to her parents and the police, as evidenced from her statement that she did not want to be medically examined in presence of her parents or inform the police about it, while her parents were present.”

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement