Mahima
Bombay High Court allowed pre-arrest bail to a rape accused after discovering that the parties have settled the discord amongst themselves.
The accused was charged with the offenses under Section 376 (2) (punishment for rape), 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating), 504 (breach of peace), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66E (violation of privacy) and 67A (transmitting material electronically) of the Information Technology Act.
Justice PD Naik validated the interim protection which was granted to the accused by the single-judge bench of Justice Bharati Dangre after he was informed that parties have sorted their conflict and are residing together.
The accused was a police constable who had an extra-marital affair with the prosecuterix based on his promise to marry her after he divorces his first wife. The accused, however, kept delaying the initiation of divorce proceedings against his wife, disgruntled by which the prosecuterix complained about the accused.
She also made an allegation that she has spent an amount of Rs. 1,70,000/- on the accused.
The accused approached the Mumbai Sessions Court which rejected his application for protection from arrest. He then approached the High Court but withdrew his application after the High Court showed its unwillingness towards granting him protection from arrest.
He filed a second anticipatory bail application before the High Court which was approved by Justice Dangre after noting that he has also instituted proceedings to quash the First Information Report (FIR) filed against him. She also observed that the parties have resolved their discord amicably and that the commitment of marriage was the pretence on which the prosecuterix permitted physical affiliation.
The Court observed that the allegations by the prosecuterix ‘reflect a consensual relationship’ proceeded to grant interim protection to the accused after he furnished a PR bond of Rs. 25,000/-.
The interim protection was confirmed by Justice Naik after it came to his knowledge that the accused has initiated unilateral divorce proceedings against his first wife.
The prosecuterix was also made a party to his second anticipatory bail application wherein she stated that she has no objection if the accused is protected from arrest.
