New Delhi: The Supreme Court has set aside Rajasthan High Court's order granting bail to Deepak Meena, son of ruling Congress party MLA Johari Lal Meena, and two others in a case of gang rape of a minor girl from a tribal community and threatening to make the video of the crime viral.
The court while setting aside the order said the offence of rape is an onslaught on the dignity of womanhood and the age-old principle of 'Yatra Naryastu Pujayante Ramante Tatra Devata' (where women are honoured, divinity blossoms) (a sloka from Manusmriti) would recede to the background and the guilty not being punished by process of law.
A bench comprising justices S Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar said the offence alleged in the case is heinous and would be an onslaught on the dignity of womanhood. "...the guilty not being punished by process of law or accused persons are allowed to move around freely in the society in spite of there being prima facie material being present...before guilt is proved and are likely to indulge in either threatening the prosecution witnesses...,” said the bench, in a judgment passed on August 23.
The top court said then the superior court would have to necessarily step in to undo the damage occasioned due to erroneous orders being passed by courts below. The bench said, “We notice that the impugned order granting bail is not only bereft of material particulars which would justify the grant of bail, but it seems that the High Court has got swayed on the ground of delay and the video having not been recovered during the course of the investigation”.
The top court observed that the high court “has given a complete go-by to the allegation made in the FIR and statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. as also the testimony of the prosecutrix before the jurisdictional court”. The top court said the fact that even after recording of the deposition of the prosecutrix other prosecution witnesses have not come forward to tender evidence though more than nine dates of hearing have passed, would lend credence to the apprehension of the complainant.
“The complainant’s grievance, throughout has been that Deepak had been threatening the prosecutrix and other witnesses and that there is every possibility of a threat to their life in the event they depose to the truth, and such apprehension is justifiable, especially because the accused is in a domineering position”, said the bench.
The top court noted that the complainant underlines the influence and possibility of the clout being wielded on the witnesses which cannot be discounted. It said the high court seems to have erred in not considering these basic facts.
According to the prosecution, the survivor, aged 15 years and six months, was studying in Class X. She got acquainted with a boy named Vivek and he seduced her to take her to a hotel on February 24, 2021. Vivek along with his friends Deepak and Netram gang-raped her after drugging and took videos of the incident. It was alleged that all of them had threatened her not to disclose the incident as otherwise they would eliminate her constable father and brother and make the video viral. The survivor was subjected to sexual assault a number of times thereafter.
The top court noted the accused Deepak was dropped from the charge sheet only on the ground that call details of his mobile provided to the investigating authorities did not disclose his presence at the scene of the incident on that particular date and as such the charge sheet was filed only against Vivek and Netram. “The prosecutrix had also named Deepak having participated in the incident of gang-rape in her statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. and had also named him in the FIR”, noted the bench.
The top court observed that the probe found that entries at the hotel were specifically missing and the CCTV footage of the date of the incident was not available. It was only upon the application filed by the victim that the trial court took cognisance of the offence against him. He surrendered before the court only on January 9, 2023, after the issuance of an arrest warrant.
Also read: 'Shocking manner in which...': Supreme Court stays ED probe into Chhattisgarh liquor 'scam'
