NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday cancelled the bail of a rape accused, saying the Karnataka High Court has ignored the facts that there could have been some delay in filing the complaint as the alleged victim could have taken some time to "get out of the shock".
The top court set aside June 10 verdict, whole noting that it appeared what has weighed with the high court was that the complaint was filed five days later. It said the allegation that he had committed the offence by intoxicating her was a matter of trial.
A bench of Justices M R Shah and Hima Kohli said the high court has failed to appreciate the allegations in the FIR that immediately on the occurrence, when the woman regained consciousness, she first went to the hospital and thereafter, tried to lodge the FIR but no complaint was taken.
"In a case like this, the high court has not properly appreciated the fact that there could have been some delay (though in the present case, it may not be said that there was any inordinate delay in lodging the FIR) as sometime could have been consumed for the victim/prosecutrix to get out of the shock. Even the said aspect is required to be considered at the time of the trial," the bench said in its judgement.
The court passed the judgement on an appeal filed by the complainant challenging the high court judgement releasing the accused on bail in connection with an FIR lodged for alleged offences, including that of rape.
Even otherwise, from the reasoning given, it appeared that the high court has not at all considered the seriousness of the allegations and the gravity of the offences alleged against the accused, the bench noted.
As the charge sheet has already been filed in the case, the bench said, "So, whatever material has been collected during the investigation was required to be considered by the high court while considering the application under section 439 of CrPC."
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) deals with special powers of the high court or sessions court regarding bail.
Allowing the appeal, the court remitted the matter to the high court to decide the bail application afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits after perusing the material or evidence collected during the investigation which are now part of the charge sheet.
It directed the accused to surrender before the concerned court or jail authority within a week.
The petitioner was represented by senior advocate Jayna Kothari and advocate Anandita Pujari and the State and the accused were led by advocate Shubhranshu Padhi and senior advocate Aditya Sodhi.
According to the prosecution, the accused was the old friend of the complainant from Mysuru.
On February 05, 2022 he picked her up; both of them went to a Bar and Restaurant, wherein, they had snacks and alcohol and at that time, the petitioner, without the knowledge of the complainant, put something on the drinks, as a result, she became unconscious and thereafter took her to a hotel and committed sexual act.
Allowing his bail plea, the High Court's single judge bench had said, "Having taken note of the said fact into consideration whether intoxicating her subjected her to sexual act is a matter of trial and this petitioner is in custody from 11.02.2022 and no need of further custodial trial. Hence, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 439 of CrPC, subject to imposing certain conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution.
