Justice Amit Mahajan, Delhi High Court
Familiarity With Accused No Ground To Blame Victim For Sexual Assault: Delhi High Court
|The matter arose from a plea filed by a woman challenging certain observations made by a trial court in its bail order.
The Delhi High Court has held that a woman's prior familiarity or cordial relationship with the accused cannot be used to hold her responsible for the alleged sexual assault committed against her.
A Bench of Justice Amit Mahajan held, “Only because the victim had known the accused or that she was in cordial relations with him, will not make her responsible for the sexual assault.”
Background
The matter arose from a plea filed by a woman an independent journalist and a PhD scholar at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) challenging certain observations made by a trial court in its bail order that admitted the accused to bail in a rape case. The woman had accused the man of sexually assaulting her on two separate occasions after calling her to his hostel room.
In its impugned bail order, the trial court had remarked that the complainant was an educated individual and, therefore, should have been aware of the implications of her actions. The court also noted that she had voluntarily stayed in the hostel room with the accused and did not explicitly claim that she was subjected to forcible sexual intercourse without her consent. It further commented on her uncertainty regarding a long-distance relationship she was in at the time.
Findings
Taking serious exception to the trial court’s observations, the Court ruled that such remarks were uncalled for and, in effect, cast aspersions on the complainant’s character. He emphasized that a person’s voluntary presence in another’s room does not give anyone the right to commit sexual assault.
“Concededly, no person has right to sexually assault the victim for the reason that she voluntarily came to his room,” the Court said.
The Court further stated that the trauma experienced by the complainant should not have been trivialized in judicial commentary, especially at the stage of bail. He noted that issues regarding the truthfulness of the allegations are to be assessed during the trial and not while deciding a bail application.
In conclusion, the High Court allowed the woman’s plea to the extent of striking down the adverse observations made against her in the trial court’s order. While the bail granted to the accused was not revoked, the Court made it clear that the remarks imputing character-based judgments on the complainant were inappropriate and needed to be expunged from the record.
Cause Title: X v. State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi & Ors.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Warisha Farasat, Suvarna Swain & Kaustubh Chaturvedi
Respondents: Advocates Sunil Kumar Gautam, Geeta Verma & Pawan Kumar