Delhi High Court Grants Bail to 20-Year-Old Accused in Professor’s Rape Case

The Court noted that the prosecutrix appeared to have willingly entered and sustained a relationship for over a year and that she was aware of the repercussions of entering into a relationship with a student.

The Delhi High Court has recently issued an order for anticipatory bail in favor of a 20-year-old student who stands accused of the offense of sexual assault perpetrated on his 35-year-old professor, allegedly under the false pretext of a marriage proposal.

In a single-judge ruling, Justice Saurabh Banerjee made a judicial observation wherein it was duly noted that the complainant, herein referred to as the “prosecutrix” (the professor), is a person of mature age, approximately 35 years old, and had previously been in a consensual romantic relationship with the accused when he was a young adult of 20 years.

The Court additionally acknowledged the civil status of the prosecutrix, specifically her prior marriage and ongoing divorce proceedings. In light of these contextual factors, the Court exercised its discretion to grant pre-arrest bail to the accused student.

“Prima facie, it seems that she was in a relationship with the applicant (accused) out of choice and desire rather out of compulsion or force. More so, whence she out of her own sweet will voluntarily chose to proceed with the applicant with open eyes, open ears and an open mind,” the Court held.

The story starts when the woman first met the accused in February 2022 at their college.

In May 2022, they had a simple wedding at a temple in Manali while she was on a work trip. The boy promised they’d have a proper legal marriage later on.

On June 4, 2022, she met the student’s family at his home, and they were okay with their marriage plans.

However, things took a turn in April 2023 when the woman found out she was pregnant. The accused and his family pressured her to take a pill to end the pregnancy.

Later, in June 2023, she got pregnant again. On July 1, 2023, the accused took money from her and left. The next day, he arranged a doctor’s appointment for her, and that was the last time they saw each other.

The accused’s lawyer said he didn’t intend to harm the woman, and he argued that she had been intimidating him and his family. He believed the complaint was filed just to harass the accused, who was a 20-year-old college student.

On the other side, the government’s lawyer opposed the accused’s request for bail, saying the alleged crimes were very serious.

The Court noted that while rape cases are serious, it’s crucial to consider all the details and the relationship between the woman and the accused, and the woman knew the accused was too young to marry.
“It would not be wrong for this Court to conclude at this stage that the prosecutrix was/ is someone who is having more than average intelligence and who was/ is well aware of the rights of a married woman and that the applicant had not reached marital age yet. It would also not be wrong for this Court to infer that she was/ is well aware of the repercussions of entering into a relation with such an underage individual ‘Student’,” the Court remarked.

The Court looked at the facts and thought that the woman willingly had a relationship with the accused for over a year.

The Court also said the accused wasn’t a “proclaimed offender” who can’t ask for bail. He was just a “proclaimed person” trying to avoid being arrested, according to a law called Section 82 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). He hadn’t officially become a “Proclaimed Offender” under Section 82 (4) of the CrPC.

So, the Court decided that the student had shown enough to get bail.

“Even otherwise, this Court is not required to critically analyze the evidence on record at the stage of considering grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant,” the single-judge said.

Hence, the Court granted the request for anticipatory bail with specific terms, which included posting a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 and providing one surety of the same value.

The accused was represented by Senior Advocate Pramod Kumar Dubey, along with a team of advocates, including Abhik Chimni, Pallavi Garg, Anant Khajuri, Saharsh, Satyam Sharma, Aditi, Akshat Sharma, and Riya Pahuja.