 on her forehead and a mangalsutra, (showing photographs). He has a influential background.){kind=link}
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice in a plea filed by a woman against the bail granted to a man accused of raping her repeatedly on the false promise of marriage and forcing her to abort a child.
During the hearing today, the Court was informed by the petitioner’s counsel that the accused had put vermillion (sindoor) on her forehead and a mangalsutra, (showing photographs). He has a influential background.
Chief Justice N.V Ramana asked, “What’s he doing?”
The counsel for the accused replied, “He is a law student.”
Justice Hima Kohli pointed out from the petition, asked the accused counsel, “What is your response to page 161-163, what are you celebrating (Bhaiya is Back)? There are hoardings saying (Bhaiya is Back)?”
He replied, “The challan has been filed.”
Justice Kohli said, “Answer the specific question.”
Also Read: Supreme Court adjourns Bikram Singh Majithia NDPS case to April 21
CJI said, “If you don’t answer, we will cancel your bail, right now! Is he Bhaiya, what is meant by Bhaiya is Back? I am asking you what is Bhaiya Back?”
The counsel for the accused replied, “This hoarding (was put up) after the bail. Kindly grant me time to file a reply to this plea against bail.”
Thereafter, the Court issued notice and directed the accused to file the counter. The matter would now be heard next Monday (April 18).
CJI said, “Ask your Bhaiya to be careful till next week.”
While granting bail, the High Court had said,
“prima facie it is axiomatic that there is a delay in lodging of the FIR, for which, no reasonable explanation has been given either by the prosecution or by the complainant.”
Also Read: Supreme Court issues notice in PIL seeking Aadhaar cards for people on NRC list
Petitioner’s counsel contented that the accused Shubhang Gontia be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs 1 lakh with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for securing his presence before the said Court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during trial and for complying with the conditions enumerated in sub-section (3) of Section 437 of CrPC. Before the High Court, the accused had filed a application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of bail arrested on 29.09.2021 in connection with Crime No. 39/21 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jabalpur (MP) for the offence punishable under Sections 376 (2) (n) and 506 of I.P.C.
The allegation against him is that he repeatedly committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on various occasions over a period of three years under the garb of false promise to marry her.
Also Read: Centre support Karnataka miners in Supreme court on iron-ore export
He had submitted that the,
“Relationship between the applicant and the complainant was consensual and both the parties mutually agreed for indulging in physical intimacy. The prosecutrix is a major and mature girl having knowledge of all consequences. Further submitted that the prosecutrix and her father want to extort money from the applicant and his family under the guise of the instant case. The applicant did not make any promise with the prosecutrix to perform marriage with her. Apart from it, there is delay of more than six months in lodging the FIR, for which, no justifiable explanation has been given by the prosecution. There is umpteen material to show blotless record of the applicant.”
The Special Leave Petition has been filed by Advocate-On-Record Vaibhav Manu Srivastava and Advocate Shikha Khurana.
Case Name- P Vs The State of Madhya Pradesh.
Also Read: