The Supreme Court of India has granted anticipatory bail to Manpreet Singh Gill, a Canadian citizen accused of rape, observing that an individual cannot be “morally condemned” based solely on unverified allegations. The decision comes after Gill challenged the denial of pre-arrest bail by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
A bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and PB Varale delivered the order on April 20, emphasizing that the nature of the relationship and the validity of the threats alleged by the complainant are matters to be determined during the trial.
The legal proceedings began following a complaint lodged by a woman with the Punjab police on November 11, 2025. The complainant alleged that Gill had misled her regarding his marital status to develop a relationship.
She further claimed that on the night between November 9 and 10, 2025, Gill administered alcohol to her, intimidated her, and forced a sexual relationship. The woman also alleged that Gill threatened her with “dire consequences” to coerce the withdrawal of a previously filed complaint.
Prior to reaching the apex court, Gill’s plea for anticipatory bail was dismissed by a trial court on December 1, 2024, and subsequently by the High Court on December 24, 2024.
Representing Gill, advocate Sana Raees Khan contended that the relationship was entirely consensual and that the FIR was motivated by an attempt at extortion. Khan argued that the complainant was fully aware of Gill’s marital status from the start of their association.
The defense pointed out significant inconsistencies in the complainant’s story, notably:
- Omission of Evidence: While the complainant claimed to have received a video on November 2, 2025, this detail was conspicuously missing from the FIR filed nine days later.
- Extortion Claims: Gill’s plea alleged that the informant had visited his house demanding ₹50 lakhs, threatening to testify against him in her statement under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, if the sum was not paid.
The Supreme Court noted that Gill had already cooperated with the investigation following an earlier interim protection order. The bench highlighted that even the complainant’s version suggested the relationship was consensual, while the allegations of coercion remained unproven.
“As to whether any threat was posed, as alleged, is a matter of evidence,” the bench observed. “Based on unverified allegations, it cannot be held that the appellant requires to be morally condemned. As such, we are of the considered view that the appellant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.”
The court allowed Gill’s plea, directing his release on anticipatory bail subject to terms set by the jurisdictional investigating officer. A primary condition of the bail is that Gill must appear before the trial court on all scheduled hearing dates unless specifically exempted.
