Bombay High Court Objects To Trial Court Granting Bail To Rape Accused On Ground Of His Upcoming Marriage

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday (September 1) cancelled the bail granted to a man booked in a gang rape case by a trial court on the ground that his marriage was scheduled to take place and that there were no injuries on the victim's private parts.Single-judge Justice Dr Neela Gokhale noted that the Additional Sessions Judge at Dindoshi (Borivali Division) had on February 24, 2025 granted bail to one Aakash Bindu on the ground that his marriage was to take place in the first week of March 2025."What bothers me the most is the considerations which are weighed by the Trial Court while writing the impugned order. The Trial Court has considered only two aspects; Firstly, that there are no injuries on the private part of the Victim albeit, the Trial Judge does record injuries on her person as appearing in the medical report; Secondly, the Trial Court appears to have been swayed by the fact that the marriage of the Accused is scheduled in the near future," the judge noted. The judge further took into account the argument by the victim that even if this ground (of accused's marriage) is considered as tenable, it was a misleading statement as till date, no marriage has been solemnised."However, the fact that the Trial Court has considered this as a parameter for grant of bail itself, is somewhat troubling. The Accused was arrested on December 9, 2024 and was released on bail on February 24, 2025, i.e., within a period of 2 and half months from the date of his arrest on the ground that his marriage was scheduled in March 2025, despite all the material on record prima facie indicting the Accused. Furthermore, the offence is that of gang rape. The alleged acts attributed to the Accused are heinous. Considering the totality of the circumstances, I am satisfied that the Trial Court has ignored the relevant material available on record and failed to consider the gravity of the offence," the judge held. According to the victim, the trial court failed to consider the evidence on record in the form of a mobile phone containing indecent photos of the victim, evidence of physical violence in terms of the head injury, scratch marks, etc., on her person and the supplementary statements of the victims and the other two co-accused in the case. She argued that marriage of the accused cannot be a consideration for marriage in such a heinous offence. "Upon taking into account the entirety of the case, it appears that the impugned order requires intercession. A plain reading of the order reveals that the Respondent-Accused was enlarged on bail, without examining all material aspects placed by the prosecution before the Trial Court by way of filing the charge-sheet and the supplementary charge-sheet," Justice Gokhale opined. With these observations the judge cancelled the bail granted to Bindu and ordered him to surrender before the DN Nagar police station in Mumbai, within two days. Appearance:Additional Public Prosecutor Megha Bajoria appeared for the State.Advocate Shlok Saraogi represented the Accused. Advocates Shivamsinh Deshmukh and Tarun Shetty represented the Victim.Case Title: State of Maharashtra vs Aakash Sandhi Bindu (Criminal Application 367 of 2025)Click Here To Read/Download Judgment

Bombay High Court Objects To Trial Court Granting Bail To Rape Accused On Ground Of His Upcoming Marriage

Narsi Benwal

Tags