 "‘She invited trouble’: How Allahabad HC has been pulled up by Supreme Court over a rape case again")
A huge controversy broke out once again after the Allahabad High Court granted bail in a rape case, stating that the woman had “herself invited trouble”.
The ruling reached the Supreme Court on Tuesday, where the top court took strong exception to the high court’s recent “objectionable” remarks in rape cases.
“What is happening in this High Court?” asked Justice BR Gavai, who was heading a bench with Justice AG Masih in the Supreme Court.
This is not the first time the high court’s remarks have been criticised. In an earlier case , it had ruled that grabbing the victim’s breasts and pulling at her pyjama strings did not amount to rape or even attempted rape, but rather a serious form of sexual assault.
ALSO READ | How huge pile of cash was found at Justice Varma’s house and why he calls it a ‘conspiracy’
The Supreme Court later put that ruling on hold.
In this explainer, we break down what the Allahabad High Court said in its order, how the Supreme Court responded, and revisit the earlier controversy involving another rape case.
‘She herself invited trouble’: What the Allahabad High Court said
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a man accused of rape, stating that the complainant “herself invited trouble” by choosing to go to the accused’s home after drinking.
The incident is reported to have taken place on September 21 last year, but the ruling by Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh came on March 11.
The woman, a postgraduate student, “was competent enough to understand the morality and significance of her act,” the court observed in the bail order.
Impact Shorts
More ShortsAccording to her complaint, the woman told the police that the accused, also a student, had promised to drop her to Noida. Instead, he allegedly took her to a flat in Gurgaon where he raped her.
In court, it was submitted on behalf of the accused that the woman was an adult, living in a PG hostel, and had voluntarily gone to a restaurant with friends, both male and female. All of them consumed alcohol and she became heavily intoxicated.
The accused’s lawyer argued that the woman and her friends remained at the bar until 3 am, after which she chose to go to the applicant’s residence to rest, as she was unable to manage on her own.
ALSO READ | How wealthy are Supreme Court judges? We may know soon
The court said, “The allegation of the victim that the applicant instead of his house took her to his relative’s flat and raped her twice is false and against the evidence on record. On the strength of said facts, it is argued that considering the facts of the case as disclosed by the victim, it is not a case of rape but may be a case of consensual relationship between the parties concerned.”
The order concluded with the observation: “This court is of the view that even if the allegation of the victim is accepted as true, then it can also be concluded that she herself invited trouble and was also responsible for the same.”
What Supreme Court said on the ruling
The apex court came down heavily on the Allahabad High Court over its remarks in the rape case, stating that judges must be “careful” when handling sensitive matters.
“There is another order passed by another judge of the same high court,” noted a bench of Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih.
“What is happening in this High Court? Now this is another judge from the same High Court saying such things… Why make all these observations? One has to be very careful with these cases which are so sensitive,” Justice BR Gavai said.
He added, “If one wants to grant bail that is okay but why make such observations that she invited trouble and all that… One has to be very careful on this side (bench) also.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that the impact of such remarks on ordinary people should be taken into account.
The Supreme Court has tagged the matter with the suo motu case it had taken up earlier over a March 17 order of the Allahabad High Court. “What message does this send? While we deal with this case, we will see other cases also,” Justice Gavai said.
The bench has now postponed the hearing in the suo motu case by four weeks.
ALSO READ | Is kanyandan relevant today? Why Allahabad HC said ritual is not essential in Hindu marriage
What happened in Allahabad HC’s earlier controversial ruling?
The high court had passed an order in a Pocso case after the accused challenged a special judge’s decision in Kasganj that had summoned them under Section 376 (rape) of the IPC, among other charges.
In its ruling, the Allahabad High Court said that grabbing the victim’s breasts and snapping her pyjama strings did not amount to rape or attempted rape, but was still a serious form of sexual assault.
Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, who gave the decision, said that after going through the details of the case involving an 11-year-old girl, it was an attack on her dignity, but it could not be seen as an attempt to rape.
The court noted, “In the present case, the allegation against accused Pawan and Akash is that they grabbed the breasts of the victim and Akash tried to bring down the lower garment of the victim and for that purpose, they had broken string of her lower garments and tried to drag her beneath the culvert, but due to intervention of witnesses they left the victim and fled away from the place of incident.”
The court said that these actions alone did not show the accused had made up their mind to commit rape, since no further steps were taken to “further their alleged desire to commit rape on the victim”.
It also said, “There is no allegation that the accused tried to commit penetrative sexual assault against the victim.”
On March 26, the Supreme Court put the high court’s March 17 order on hold , which means the ruling cannot be used in any court to seek relief by these accused or anyone else.
The top court took up the matter on its own after it was brought to the attention of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna.
A bench of Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih came down strongly on the high court’s decision, calling it “shocking”.
ALSO READ | Cash-at-home row: What’s the 2018 CBI case involving Delhi HC judge Yashwant Varma?
“We are at pains to say that some of the observations made in the impugned judgment, particularly paras 21, 24, and 26, depict a total lack of sensitivity on the part of the author of the judgment,” the bench said.
The bench further said that since the observations in question were “totally unknown to the tenets of law and depict total insensitivity and inhuman approach.”
With inputs from agencies
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
