Lawyer’s rape case: Mumbai man  denied pre-arrest bail

Mumbai: A 29-year-old man working with a satellite TV provider has been denied anticipatory bail by a Dindoshi court last Wednesday in a rape case filed against him by a woman advocate. The 40-year-old practicing lawyer had filed a complaint of intimidation on the man’s mother and sister as well. The man and his family members claimed in their plea for anticipatory bail that the woman filed false rape complaints to extorts young men with videos.

The man claimed that he had gone to her home in early January for installation of the dish TV connection and she had not made the required payment then. Thereafter, he claimed she called and asked him to pick and drop her, which he did. He said then she asked him to come home to collect the money, but forced herself on him when he went. A few days later, she asked him to book flight tickets, he said, which too he did as well as picked and dropped her when she asked. He said further that many times she expressed her love for him and asked him to book return tickets for her, but he refused to do so because she had not repaid the payment he made for the earlier ticket. Thereafter, for three days in January she confined him and established forceful sexual relations with him and then demanded Rs 2 lakh from him, to which he gave her his gold chain, he said in his plea.

The advocate who herself appeared before the court told it that she had tried to get the FIR filed, but the police had tried to evade it since one of the accused in the case is a local politician. She said she considered the man as a younger brother and gave him shelter in her home, but he raped her and stole her money.

The court in its order said that the complainant is a practicing advocate aged 40 years and the applicant is a 29-year-old man and not a minor who can be overpowered by her.

It noted that she had indeed filed outraging modesty and rape complaints earlier, but no inference can be drawn that she filed frivolous complaints to blackmail. The court said that both the parties are trying to suppress the real facts and rejected the anticipatory bail of the man, but allowed that of his family members.

(To download our E-paper please click here. The publishers permit sharing of the paper's PDF on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)

Free Press Journal