Supreme Court quashes Madhya Pradesh HC 'Rakhi for Bail' order

A bench headed by Justice A.M. Khanwilkar issued a slew of directions, which included training modules for sensitization of judges and emphasized that judges should avoid any kind of stereotyping

Topics
Supreme Court

IANS  |  New Delhi 

The on Thursday set aside Madhya Pradesh High Court's order granting bail to a man accused in a molestation case on a condition that he would tie 'Rakhi' to the victim.

A bench headed by Justice A.M. Khanwilkar issued a slew of directions, which included training modules for sensitization of judges and emphasized that judges should avoid any kind of stereotyping.

The Attorney General (AG) K.K. Venugopal had also opposed the bail condition.

The plea was filed by advocate Aparna Bhat and eight other women lawyers against the July 30 order by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, where an accused of sexual assault was asked to get a 'Rakhi' tied on him by the victim as a condition for bail.

"The bail condition in question amounts to further victimisation of the survivor in her own house. In the context of 'Raksha Bandhan' being a festival of guardianship between brothers and sisters, the said bail condition amounts to gross trivialization of the trauma suffered by the complainant in the present case", said the plea.

The petitioners had argued that the bail condition by the High Court should be set aside.

Bhat had contended in the plea that order has been passed by a constitutional court such as a High Court of a state and there is a strong likelihood that such observations and directions may result in normalizing "what is essentially a crime and has been recognised to be so by the law."

The plea said: "It is highly objectionable for the High Court in the present case to put the complainant in a position where she is forced to accept the sum of Rs 11,000 as part of the customary ritual of Raksha Bandhan. Moreover, the said bail condition also goes a step further by stating that Respondent No. 2 (the accused) tender Rs 5,000 to the son the complainant."

 

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Dear Reader,


Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.
We, however, have a request.

As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.

Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.

Digital Editor

Read our full coverage on Supreme Court
First Published: Thu, March 18 2021. 16:07 IST
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU