The Allahabad Hgh Court has rejected the bail application of Gandharv Kumar @ Gaurav accused of rape and said teachers play a crucial role in shaping the future citizens of a democratic nation, influencing not only their academic development but also moulding their civic consciousness and ethical values.
A Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Gandharv Kumar @ Gaurav.
By means of the application under Section 439 of CrPC, applicant-Gandharv Kumar @ Gaurav, who is involved in Case under Sections 366, 376, 328, 342 and 506 IPC, Police Station Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad seeks enlargement on bail.
As per prosecution case, the informant who is father of the victim has lodged an FIR on 26.10.2018 against the applicant for the offence under Section 366 IPC alleging inter-alia that his daughter used to take tuition from the applicant. On 25.10.2018 at about 12:00 in the noon, his daughter went for tuition class but did not return.
FIR also alleges that the applicant was also missing from that day and he has apprehension that the applicant has enticed away his daughter.
The main substratum of argument of the counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. Both the victim and applicant were major and indulged in a consensual relationship.
It is also submitted that both of them have solemnized marriage and got their marriage registered, therefore, an applicant who has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 24.08.2024 is entitled to be released on bail.
Per contra, AGA for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by reiterating the prosecution case. Much emphasis has been given on the statements under Section 161 and 164 CrPC of the victim, where the victim has described the act of the applicant.
It is next submitted that there are no contradictions in the statements under Section 161 and 164 CrPC of the victim.
Having heard counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, the Court found that the victim in her statements under Section 161 and 164 CrPC has made specific allegation against the applicant for committing rape upon her.
The Court also found that there is no contradiction in the statements under Section 161 and 164 CrPC of the victim, hence, no ground for false implication of the applicant is made out.
The Court said that,
In a democratic society, the role of a teacher is multifaceted and carries significant responsibilities that extend beyond the mere imparting of knowledge. The impact of a teacher’s responsibilities extends beyond the classroom, influencing the broader fabric of society and contributing to the sustainability and vitality of democracy itself. But in the instant case I find that instead of discharging his pivotal role in imparting education and knowledge to the student, he became a tormentor and victim and fell prey to the lust of the applicant.
The sexual violence is dehumanizing and unlawful intrusion to privacy and sanctity of a female. It is a serious blow to her supreme honour and offends her self esteem and dignity. It degrades and humiliates the victim and where the victim is a helpless innocent child, it leaves behind a traumatic experience. The crime of rape has a negative impact on the victim as it disrupts her mental condition. It is often stated that a woman who is raped undergoes two crises- the rape and the subsequent trial.
While the first seriously wounds her dignity, curbs her individual, destroys her sense of security and may often ruin her physically, the second is no less potent of mischief inasmuch as it not only force her to relive through the traumatic experience, but also does so in the glare of publicity in a totally alien atmosphere, with the whole apparatus and paraphernalia of the criminal justice system focused upon her.
“Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of offence, role assigned to applicant, statement of the victim and severity of punishment, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail,” the Court further observed while rejecting the bail application.