Recently, the Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to a Delhi-based doctor accused of raping a woman by promising marriage. The Court observed that there was no forceful sexual assault in the case. The Bench further observed that there was nothing to suggest that the Doctor promised to marry the woman. Therefore there was no need to look into whether the woman had given her consent for a physical relationship.
According to Hon’ble Justice Subramonium Prasad, the petitioner is working as a doctor at Safdarjung Hospital. He cannot tamper with the evidence or terrorise the prosecutrix. The police have already collected the evidence, and the petitioner’s cell phone is also with them, so the Court grants him pre-arrest bail for offences punishable u/s 376 and 328 IPC.
The prosecutrix alleged that during her father’s treatment at Safdarjung hospital, the petitioner came to her house, gave his marriage profile and asked for hers.
She further alleged that on 09.09.2020, the petitioner called her to his residence, gave her a cold drink laced with sedatives and when she gained consciousness, she realised she was raped. When the prosecutrix confronted the Doctor, he threatened her and told her that he would make her video viral. She also alleged that the Doctor raped her on two other occasions (17.06.2020 and 16.09.2020).
Sessions Courts rejected the Doctor’s pre-arrest bail application by ruling that he had made a false promise to marry the prosecutrix.
The case before the High Court
Senior Counsel Mohit Kumar who appeared for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner was cooperating with the police and his cell phone was already in their possession. He further stated that the woman and her sister’s statement did not match, so there was no use to arrest the petitioner.
On the other hand, the prosecutrix’s counsel contended that the petitioner had committed a heinous crime and that the prosecutrix started receiving obscene texts from unknown numbers at the Doctor’s behest.
Observation and Decision of the Court
The Bench noted that the prosecutrix’s earlier statement and the present one did not match and further observed that no promise for marriage was made per material on record.
According to the Bench, the prosecutrix is a makeup artist and a Delhi resident, and it cannot be said that she was a naive woman. The Court reasoned that there was nothing to suggest that the Doctor made a false promise for marriage and the woman had consented to physical relations out of her own free will.
The Court proceeded to grant anticipatory bail to the Doctor.