38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, November 04, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
CelebStreet

Rape Case Against TV Actor Karan Oberoi: Court Refuses To Buy Story Of Woman

By LawStreet News Network      22 May, 2019 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Rape Case Against TV Actor Karan Oberoi: Court Refuses To Buy Story Of Woman

Bringing in much relief to actor Karan Oberoi, a Sessions Court has refused to buy the story of rape and blackmail of a woman in Oshiwara, Mumbai in 2017.

Additional Sessions Judge S.U. Baghele held that it disbelieved the story of a 34-year-old complainant who has accused Oberoi of raping her by administering some intoxicant as well her accusation that he had videotaped the act and extorted money by threatening to circulate the video.

Jassi Jaissi Koi Nahin fame actor was arrested by Mumbai police on May 5, 2019. The Dindoshi Sessions Court on May 17, 2019, rejected his bail plea stating it would not be appropriate to grant bail at this stage.

The order passed by Justice Baghele states that, The story in respect of sexual intercourse by administration of intoxicating substance is difficult to believe for the reason that the informant is said to have left for her house soon after the incident. The story in respect of extortion under intimidation to make the video go viral is also difficult to believe looking to the fact that the informant continued to give gifts to the applicant from time to time and also looking into the WhatsApp messages showing their continuous cordial relationship.

On perusal of WhatsApp messages on record, the court noted that they went to the extent of chatting in obscene language. It is also seen they had developed intimacy. However, there is no message to the extent that the actor had promised to marry her.

The court also made note of the costly articles gifted by the informant to the applicant and his relatives and transfer of huge sums of money by the informant to the bank account of the applicant.

The court said, A prudent person can understand one-sided love wherein one may be prepared to give up everything blindly for someone else. However, the acceptance of valuable things and money by another person would cause one to think in a different direction. The applicant as a prudent person cannot be expected to have accepted them unless the relationship between them was a committed relationship, thereby inclined to get united together as life partners.

Further, the court also said, In that view of the matter though, this court, prime facie, finds it difficult to believe the initial story of rape, continued sexual intercourse, either by expressly or by impliedly pretending to an intention of marriage, which amounts to rape, as the intention appears to be otherwise than to get married since inception.

Advocate Dinesh Tiwari, appearing for Oberoi argued before the court that the actor had never promised marriage nor committed himself and that intimacy was consensual and that even the FIR doesnt mention she gave gifts because it was a committed relationship. He had also questioned the unexplained delay in filing the FIR.

On the other hand, the lawyers, appearing for the informant argued that he wanted a committed relationship and that is why immediate filing of FIR is not expected and also she paid and transferred him money and fulfilled all his demands too because of false promise of marriage...And obscene messages were exchanged due to commitment of marriage.

(With inputs from TOI)



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

no-law-student-shall-be-barred-from-exams-or-academic-progression-due-to-attendane-shortage-delhi-hc
Trending Judiciary
No Law Student Shall Be Barred From Exams Or Academic Progression Due To Attendane Shortage: Delhi HC [Read Judgment]

Delhi HC rules no law student can be barred from exams or academic progress for low attendance; directs BCI to rethink attendance norms and strengthen grievance systems.

03 November, 2025 04:03 PM
mere-refusal-to-marry-does-not-constitute-instigation-under-section-306-ipc-supreme-court
Trending Judiciary
Mere Refusal To Marry Does Not Constitute Instigation Under Section 306 IPC: Supreme Court [Read Order]

Mere refusal to marry does not amount to instigation under Section 306 IPC, rules Supreme Court, quashing FIR and holding no abetment in emotional distress cases.

03 November, 2025 04:15 PM

TOP STORIES

lawyers-to-stop-arguing-when-court-indicates-its-mind-sc
Trending Judiciary
Lawyers to stop arguing when court indicates its mind: SC [Read Judgment]

SC: Lawyers must stop arguing once court indicates its mind, stressing that harmony between Bench and Bar ensures dignified court functioning.

29 October, 2025 04:25 PM
wangchuks-detention-order-suffers-from-gross-illegality-and-arbitrariness-activists-wife-tells-sc
Trending Judiciary
Wangchuk's detention order suffers from gross illegality and arbitrariness, activist's wife tells SC

Wife of activist Sonam Wangchuk tells SC his detention under NSA suffers from illegality, citing stale FIRs, procedural lapses, and denial of fair representation.

29 October, 2025 04:35 PM
police-can-register-fir-for-threatening-witness-courts-complaint-not-needed-sc
Trending Judiciary
Police can register FIR for threatening witness; court's complaint not needed: SC [Read Judgment]

SC says police can directly file FIR for witness threats under Section 195A IPC; no court complaint needed as it’s a cognisable offence.

29 October, 2025 04:44 PM
sc-hints-at-pan-india-guidelines-on-timeline-to-frame-charges
Trending Judiciary
SC hints at pan-India guidelines on timeline to frame charges

SC mulls pan-India guidelines to curb delays in framing charges; notes cases where charges aren’t framed even after years despite BNSS mandate of 60 days.

30 October, 2025 12:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email