Rape allegation after emotional aftermath: Allahabad High Court grants bail to accused

The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to a 42-year-old married man, accused of rape of a 25-year-old woman, noting that the FIR was lodged after delay of several months and seemed to arise more from the ’emotional aftermath’ of their failed relationship, rather than from any bona fide grievance of criminal wrongdoing.

The court also expressed concern over an emerging trend where failed intimate relationships are increasingly resulting in criminal proceedings.

“This case is reflective of a broader societal shift, where the sanctity and solemnity once associated with intimate relationships have seen a marked decline.

The prevalence of transient and uncommitted relationships, often formed and dissolved at will, raises critical questions about individual responsibility and the misuse of legal provisions, especially when such relationships turn sour.”

The court added that it is increasingly being observed that ‘personal fallouts’ and ’emotional discord’ are being given a criminal colour, through the invocation of penal laws, particularly in the aftermath of “failed intimate relationships”.

Justice Krishan Pahal, while allowing the bail application of one Arun Kumar Mishra,  observed that the woman, with full and conscious knowledge of the applicant’s marital history, that he had been married thrice before, chose to establish a corporeal relationship with him.

The applicant’s counsel argued that the FIR was delayed six months, and that the victim was in a consensual relationship with the applicant, and that she willingly travelled with him to many places and stayed in hotels with him during the period he allegedly committed the crime.

On the other hand, the informant’s counsel argued that the applicant was already married to three other ladies and is a Casanova and is used to luring different women into consensual relationships.

In this backdrop, the court in its order dated April 9 granted bail to the applicant accused, emphasising that “not all socially or ethically questionable actions warrant legal intervention.”