The Bombay High Court recently granted bail to a 40-year-old man booked for allegedly raping his subordinate at a call centre in Mumbai, stating that the 29-year-old victim was not a minor and since she was working in a city like Mumbai, she was capable of understanding the consequences of the act that she permitted, adding that the argument that the relationship was at the instance of the man cannot be accepted. The court noted that even as per the victim's statement, she never alleged that the relationship was established on the promise of marriage. The woman's version was that she was coerced into the relationship on the pretext that she would lose her job otherwise, the court added. A single-judge bench of Justice Bharati H Dangre said it can be decided during the trial as to whether the sexual act was free of consent and will. The judge further said that the applicant who has been incarcerated since September last year deserved to be released on bail since the probe is complete. The court pointed out that the man was willing to accept paternity of the child born out of the alleged relationship and give Rs 10 lakh towards her maintenance. The applicant was arrested on September 13, 2021 for offences punishable under section 376 of the IPC. The complaint was filed at Malvani Police station by the woman who stated that she was appointed at a call centre as a team leader and was working under the supervision of the applicant. The complainant alleged that from the beginning of her work, the applicant tried to establish proximity with her but since she was supposed to work under him, she never objected for the fear of losing her job. The victim said she was asked by the applicant to accompany her on a drive and when she refused, he threatened her with job dismissal. Following this, she agreed to accompany the accused in his car from where he took her to a hotel, allegedly forced her into a physical relationship and warned her against disclosing the act to anyone, the complaint stated. The incident was repeated in March and April last year. In August 2021, when she missed her periods and tested positive for pregnancy, she informed about the same to the accused who advised her to undergo an abortion. The accused wired Rs 29,990 through Google Pay to the woman for the procedure but she opted to carry the pregnancy to term. In November 2021, she delivered a child. The complainant, through advocate Ajinkya Udane, opposed the plea and said that the accused was holding an influential position working as her superior and had driven her into a relationship and then asked her to commit abortion when she conceived. However, advocates Anil Lalla and Anjali Patil for the applicant said that even though the complainant alleged that she was threatened into forming a relationship, she continued her association with the accused from March 2021 until August 2021, when she reported about the incident. The applicant did not dispute paternity of the child despite DNA report being awaited and showed willingness to hand over Rs 10 lakh towards the child born out of the alleged relationship as a “kind gesture”. The mother accepted the said amount in the form of maintenance while making it clear that the acceptance did not establish that she was in a relationship with the accused. The bench clarified that acceptance of the amount does not suggest that the complainant shall give her NOC for quashing the FIR and granted the accused bail. The court placed a condition before the accused that he should not make any attempt to pressurise the victim failing which he would be deprived of the liberty given to him.
