Honey trap victim dies: Gujarat High Court says ‘shocks civilised world’, rejects bail plea

“The growing culture of violence, extortion, honey trap and exploitation in society sends shockwaves through the civilised world. When such incidents occur or continue, there is a constant erosion of basic human values, such as tolerance and the spirit of ‘live and let live’,” the September 23 order read.

Accused, police constable brother’s involvement

The complainant, who is the brother of the victim, claimed that the accused had led the alleged honey trap, recorded a video of the victim in a compromising situation with a woman and extorted Rs 10 lakh from him. It also alleged that the accused repeatedly abused and physically and mentally harassed the victim.

He further claimed that several complaints had been made to the police about the alleged harassment. However, he alleged that no effective action was taken because one of the co-accused was the man’s brother and was serving as a police constable.

Justice Hasmukh D Suthar noted that the initial suicide complaint did not mention the honey trap, but the victim’s dying declaration specifically described the accused’s alleged role.

The state also referred to earlier complaints and alleged that the accused and the co-accused had continued to harass his brother. Assistant public prosecutor, Shruti Pathak, said the victim’s dying declaration had been recorded and five video clips were recovered from a mobile phone and sent to the forensic science laboratory for examination. The report was awaited.

The state argued that one co-accused was a police constable and the other co-accused had been arrested and identified. It said that if the accused was released on bail, there was a possibility of evidence being tampered with.

The accused, through advocate Laxmansinh M Zala, claimed that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated. He argued that the investigation was complete and the chargesheet had already been filed. He also submitted that the complaint was filed belatedly and that there had been no earlier allegations of a honey trap against him.

‘Victim named him in dying declaration’

The court noted that the 35-year-old victim died by suicide after allegedly leaving behind a note naming the accused. The court further noted allegations that the accused forced the victim to consume liquor and recorded a video after he had a physical relationship with the woman. The accused allegedly then used the video to extort Rs 10 lakh.

The court noted that although the initial suicide complaint did not mention the honey trap, the victim’s dying declaration specifically described the accused’s alleged role. The transcript of a video clip also contained allegations that the accused persons had subjected the victim to mental and physical torture for two to three months and pressured him to settle or withdraw his police complaints.

The court also noted that the accused’s lawyer had sought bail on the ground that the investigation was over and the chargesheet had been filed. “However, it is needless to say that merely chargesheet is filed is not a ground to release the applicant on bail,” it added. 

Considering the seriousness of the allegations and the possibility of evidence tampering, the court dismissed the bail application. It also directed the trial court to expedite the trial.