The Supreme Court of India on Monday asked a government servant, accused of repeatedly raping a minor, whether he would marry the victim. This came as the apex court heard an appeal against a verdict of the Bombay High Court’s Aurangabad Bench by which an order of the Sessions Court granting the petitioner anticipatory bail was set aside.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sharad Arvind Bobde, who heard this matter, asked “Will you marry her?” The petitioner’s counsel replied stating “I will take instructions”.
The Chief Justice of India responded “You should have thought before seducing and raping the young girl. You knew you are a government servant.”
The CJI further said: “We are not forcing you to marry. Let us know if you will. Otherwise, you will say we are forcing you to marry her.”
The petitioner’s counsel replied, “I wanted to marry her. But she refused. Now I cannot, as I am already married. The trial is going on, charges are yet to be framed.”
The apex court stayed the petitioner’s arrest and granted him interim protection for four weeks. The petitioner was, however, asked to apply for regular bail.
As per the case, the petitioner used to follow the girl then 16 on her way to school. The petitioner, who is distantly related to the victim, entered her house through the backdoor one day when the girl’s family members were out of town. He then committed rape upon her after gagging her mouth besides tying her hands and legs.
He also threatened the victim that he would throw acid on her face if she disclosed the incident to anyone besides threatening to harm her family members. He repeatedly raped the victim using these threats.
READ: Ahmedabad Woman Releases Suicide Video Before Jumping Into Sabarmati River, Netizens Demand Justice
The victim, who was in Class 9, attempted to commit suicide one day but was stopped by her mother. A complaint was then lodged against the appellant. The petitioner’s mother stopped them from lodging the complaint while promising that she would get her son married to the girl once she turns 18.
It was also alleged the petitioner’s mother made the victim’s mother, an illiterate, sign an undertaking stating there was an affair between their children and the sexual relations were consensual.
The petitioner’s mother, however, refused to facilitate the marriage after the girl attained the majority. The victim then filed a complaint against the petitioner.
