A Delhi court denied anticipatory bail to a former Delhi University professor accused of raping a former student. The court observed concerns around power imbalance, coercion, and intimidation.
In an order dated 12 October, a Delhi court denied anticipatory bail to a former Delhi University professor accused of raping a former student and threatening to circulate her private videos.
The court denied bail on risks of victim intimidation and evidence tampering. The Additional Sessions Judge Gomati Manocha, denying bail, stated,
“In case the accused is granted anticipatory bail, there is a substantial risk of influencing or threatening the victim, risk of tampering with the electronic evidence and possibility of repetition of threats or coercive contact.”
Noting concerns around intimidation of the complainant, the court also asked the investigating officer to examine allegations that the accused or his associates were pressuring her not to pursue the case, and to record statements of individuals aware of such pressure. The court said the investigation should be assigned to a named senior officer so that original mobile phones could be obtained and preserved, to ensure fairness to both the complainant and the accused.
It was also observed that the WhatsApp chats between the accused and the complainant appeared to indicate coercion and intimidation rather than merely a past consensual relationship. The complainant, a former Delhi University student, had alleged that the accused, a former Delhi University professor, sexually exploited her several times on the false promise of marriage and threatened to circulate private videos of her if she did not comply with his demands. She also alleged that he had established sexual relations with her after administering a stupefying substance and recording private videos without her consent.
The accused denied the allegations, stating that they had been in a consensual relationship for over three years. His counsel argued that the FIR was a counterblast to a separate criminal case registered following an incident in July 2026.
Rejecting the plea for anticipatory bail, the court observed that the accused’s position as the complainant’s teacher was a material circumstance in assessing possible concerns over power imbalance, coercion, and intimidation. The court also asked the Delhi Commissioner of Police to submit a report to the jurisdictional magistrate within 15 days on assigning the investigation to a named senior officer.
Read Also: DU Women’s Colleges Call for Solidarity March to Reclaim the Streets; Hundreds of Women Take Part
Image Credits: Live Law
Sahaj J
[email protected]
Comments are closed.