Granting Bail In Rape Case By Adopting Liberal Approach Is Against Interest Of Society: Andhra Pradesh High Court Denies Bail To Law Student
The Andhra Pradesh High Court was considering a Bail Petition filed by the Petitioner/first accused in an alleged case of rape.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed the bail petition of a law student in an alleged case of rape and observed that granting of bail in such cases by adopting a liberal approach would be against the interest of the society.
The High Court was considering a Criminal Petition, filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, by the Petitioner/first accused, seeking regular bail, in a case registered under Sections 70(1), 77, 351(2), 69 and 75(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67-A of Information Technology Act, 2000.
The Single Bench of Justice T Mallikarjuna Rao stated, “The offence of rape is punishable by rigorous imprisonment for at least ten years, extendable to life imprisonment with a fine. Gang rape carries twenty years’ rigorous imprisonment, extendable to life imprisonment with a fine. The offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner is grave in nature. In fact, rape cannot be considered as a mere physical assault. In an occurrence of this type, the resistance from the victim cannot be expected, there is no allegation that the victim was inimical or was acting against the instigation of somebody else. Therefore, the cases relating to granting of bail in offences of rape are required to be approached differently, as granting of bail in such cases by adopting a liberal approach would be against the interest of the society.”
Advocate Duvvada Ramesh represented the Petitioner, while Public Prosecutor represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The de facto complainant alleged that the first accused developed intimacy with her by promising love and marriage. One day, at the Kambalakonda Park, the first accused forcefully had sexual intercourse with her, deceitfully reiterating his promise of marriage. In another incident, he took her to the rented room of his friend/A4 and forcibly engaged in sexual intercourse with her. Later, friends of the accused petitioner i.e, A2 to A4 showed her private videos captured earlier and threatened to share them publicly if she resisted. Under the duress, all four accused sexually exploited her. The accused was continuously harassed and tortured her for sexual favours thereafter. Unable to bear the harassment, she attempted to commit suicide.
Reasoning
The Bench, at the outset, clarified that while the filing of a charge sheet is a significant factor in granting bail, it is not the sole criterion to be considered. The same has to be evaluated in conjunction with the facts and circumstances of the case at hand.
It was noticed that in the present matter, although the charge sheet had been filed, the de facto complainant’s statements specifically highlighted the key role played by the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offence. The petitioner had been assigned the role of facilitating the participation of other persons who were accused in the case. Specifically, these persons were alleged to have coerced the de facto complainant into engaging in physical relations.
“The petitioner’s role, according to the charges, involves actively participating in or enabling the actions of the other accused persons. This could suggest that the petitioner has played a key role in facilitating, encouraging, or possibly even directly pressuring the victim into the alleged situation accused persons. This could suggest that the petitioner has played a key role in facilitating, encouraging, or possibly even directly pressuring the victim into the alleged situation”, it said.
The Bench further noticed that the complainant/victim and the first three accused persons are students of a Law College. The victim is presently in her third year of study, whereas A1 to A3 are in the final year of the LLB course. It was noted that the petitioner-accused coerced the complainant into engaging in sexual acts with the other accused persons, and following the incident, the accused persons continued to harass the complainant, repeatedly calling her and demanding sex, threatening to share the compromising video. The Bench also considered the fact that the accused persons pressured her to participate in sexual acts with his friends, and fearing the public exposure of the video, the victim attempted to take her own life by hanging herself in a bedroom.
“It is not necessary now to go into detail about the correctness or otherwise of the allegations made against the accused as this is a subject matter to be dealt with by the trial judge. The period of incarceration by itself would not entitle the petitioner/accused to be enlarged on bail”, the Bench held while dismissing the Petition.
Cause Title: Batha Vamsi v. The State Station House Officer (Case No.: Criminal Petition No. 1986/2025)
