'Victim Herself Invited Trouble, Was Responsible For It': Allahabad HC Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Raping College Student

The victim alleged that the accused, whom she met at a bar, raped her twice in his relative's apartment after she had agreed to go to his place to rest, as she was heavily intoxicated and needed support after consuming alcohol.

“This Court is of the view that even if the allegation of the victim is accepted as true, then it can also be concluded that she herself invited trouble and was also responsible for the same. Similar stand has been taken by the victim in her statement. In her medical examination, her hymen was found torn but doctor did not give any opinion about the sexual assault,” a bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh observed as it allowed accused's bail plea.

The bench also added that as an MA student, the Victim was competent enough to understand the “morality and significance of her act” as disclosed by her in the F.I.R.

Essentially, as per the victim's version, she, of her own volition, went to a bar in Delhi along with three female friends, where they consumed alcohol, due to which she became intoxicated.

She further claimed that she remained at the bar until around 3:00 AM, and during her time there, the accused kept on insisting she accompany him to his house. As she was in need of support due to her condition, she agreed to go with him to rest.

However, she further alleged, the accused touched her inappropriately on the way and instead of taking her to his residence in Noida, as she had expected, he took her to a relative's flat in Gurgaon, where he committed rape against her.

Seeking bail in the case, the accused moved the HC wherein his counsel argued that even if all the allegations are taken to be true, it is not a case of rape but may be a case of consensual relationship between the parties concerned.

It was also argued that the accused has been languishing in jail since December 2024, having no criminal history to his credit, and that if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

Per contra, the Additional Government Advocate for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant in the light of the FIR, but he did dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant.

Against the backdrop of these submissions, the Court granted him bail by observing thus:

“Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the o1ence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a &t case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed”