MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Delhi High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail in Controversial Rape Case: “Relationship Consensual in Nature,” Says Justice Bhatnagar

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, under the bench of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar, granted anticipatory bail to Krishan Gaba, the petitioner in the case FIR No. 260/2023. The case, involving serious allegations under Sections 376, 377, and 504 of the IPC for rape and threats, saw a pivotal turn as the court observed the relationship between the petitioner and the prosecutrix to be “consensual in nature.”

The decision, pronounced on November 9, 2023, came after a detailed examination of the allegations made by the prosecutrix and the defense put forward by the petitioner. The prosecutrix had accused Gaba of forceful physical relations, threats with nude photographs, and a forced abortion. In contrast, the defense highlighted the prosecutrix’s marital status and previous actions, including a withdrawn complaint and a false divorce decree.

Justice Bhatnagar, in his observation, noted, “The relationship between the petitioner and the complainant/prosecutrix appears to be consensual in nature.” This remark played a crucial role in tilting the scales in favor of the petitioner, leading to the grant of anticipatory bail.

Represented by a team of advocates led by Dr. Adish C. Aggarwala, Sr. Adv., the petitioner’s argument focused on the inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements and her marital status. The court also took into consideration the lack of substantial evidence regarding the video-graphed sexual acts and the unsubstantiated threat complaints.

The decision has sparked discussions about the complexities Involved in cases of alleged sexual offenses, especially regarding the interpretation of consent and the impact of personal relationships on legal proceedings.

While granting anticipatory bail, the court also directed the petitioner to join the investigation as required and furnished a personal bond of Rs. 25,000. The court’s decision, however, does not reflect an opinion on the merits of the case, as clarified by Justice Bhatnagar in his order.

This judgment has opened a new chapter in the legal discourse on sexual offenses and consent, bringing to light the nuanced and delicate nature of such cases in the Indian judicial system.

Date of Decision: 09 November 2023

KRISHAN GABA  VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

Latest Legal News