It is unbecoming of an Indian woman to sleep after she was raped ruled Karnataka HC while granting bail to the accused person

It is unbecoming of an Indian woman to sleep after she was raped ruled Karnataka HC while granting bail to the accused person

Pranjal Sharma | Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad | 25th July 2020

“It is unbecoming of an Indian woman to sleep after the perpetration of such act” – High court of Karnataka

Sri Rakesh B Verses State of Karnataka

FACTS

  1. The petition arises out of petitioner, who is accused of offences punishable under Section 376, 420 and 506 of the IPC and section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, seeking an Advance Bail.
  2. The State strongly opposes granting of the bail as the petitioner is accused of offences of serious nature and that there is enough material on record to relate the petitioner to the commission of the said offence.

JUDGEMENT

The court held that although the offences alleged against the petitioner are of serious nature, but solely can not be criteria to deny the liberty to the citizen when there is prima facie no case from the side of the State police.  

The court raised questions like

  1. Why the defendant did not approach the court at the earliest when the petitioner allegedly forced her for sexual favours.
  2. Explanation to the letter written by the defendant agreeing to withdraw the complaint on a compromise.
  3. Why she went to office late at night around 11:00 PM and why she didn’t object to consuming drinks with the petitioner and staying there till morning.
  4. The peculiarity in the defendants statement that she was tired and fell asleep after the perpetration of the act.

To the justification provided by the defendant as to why she said until morning, the Judge stated that “it is unbecoming of an Indian women; that is not the way our women react when they are ravished.”

Considering all the disparities deeming them sufficient grounds to admit the petitioner to an Advance Bail, especially when granting of the bail is the rule and denial is an exception according to the Gudikanti Narasimhulu vs. Public Prosecutor[1]. It was also held that the court cannot lose the sight of COVID-19 Pandemic which poses a threat of infection to the detenues in prison.

The Advance Bail was granted on the conditions that –

  1. The petitioner shall execute a Personal Bond for the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 only with sureties for the like sum.
  2. The petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation and appear before the police when directed.
  3. The petitioner shall not leave jurisdictional limits without prior permission.
  4. The petitioner shall mark his attendance in the police station every second and fourth Saturday of the month.
  5. The petitioner shall not tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses nor do anything prejudicial to peace and order in the society.
  6. It is open to the jurisdictional police or the complainant to seek cancellations or the perpetrates any offence.

[1] AIR 1978 SC 429

460 259 LexForti Legal News Network
Share

Leave a Reply

Avatar

LexForti Legal News Network

LexForti Legal News and Journal offer access to a wide array of legal knowledge through the Daily Legal News segment of our Website. It provides the readers with the latest case laws in layman terms. Our Legal Journal contains a vast assortment of resources that helps in understanding contemporary legal issues.

All stories by : LexForti Legal News Network
About Author
Avatar

LexForti Legal News Network

LexForti Legal News and Journal offer access to a wide array of legal knowledge through the Daily Legal News segment of our Website. It provides the readers with the latest case laws in layman terms. Our Legal Journal contains a vast assortment of resources that helps in understanding contemporary legal issues.

Consult
Leave this field blank
SUBSCRIBE only if you like the content!