On Wednesday 25th of November, the Himachal Pradesh High Court granted bail to a man who allegedly impersonated with a Hindu name, even though he is a Muslim. He made sexual relations with a woman, promised to marry her, and later on resiled from the same.
By: Vanshika Sahu, Satpura law College, Chhindwara, Madhya Pradesh.
The petitioner was arrested in an FIR registered under Sections 376, 506, 419, 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code,1860 (IPC). The petitioner was arrested in Woman Public Station in Una District, Himachal Pradesh.
The case against the Petitioner
The woman filed the case on the Petitioner with an accusation made upon him that he revealed his name as Vicky Sharma; a Hindu, who was, in fact, a Muslim, and his real name was Abdul Rehman.
Allegedly, disguising his identity, the petitioner Abdul Rehman made false promises of marriage and showed her a bright future. The victim stated that he too promised to marry her. In such a ploy, they committed sexual intercourse on several occasions. When the victim came to know about his reality through one of her friends, she was shocked and stunned.
The victim went to the petitioner’s home to verify his real identity at Talwara, where she came up with his real identity of Abdul Rehman. She told everything to his family members. His sister’s and other family members refused to pursue her marriage with Abdul Rehman on the ground that she belongs to the Scheduled Caste Community.
When the petitioner came to know that the woman was at her home, he reached there and defamed her by filthy abuses. As the victim was not ready to leave the house, the petitioner dragged her inside the room and beat her mercilessly.
After the great struggle, she rescued herself from the clutches of Abdul Rehman. He warned her that if she tried to visit his home again, he would throw acid on her face.
The victim told the court that she had handed over a sum of Rs. 1.2 lakhs to Abdul Rehman when he asked her for some money as he was buying a new car. Apart from this, the victim has handed him Rs. 10,000/-, 5,000/- and 50,000/- on several occasions. The petitioner had not returned even a single penny.
The Court, in its order, observed “The victim is aged 21 years. She was pursuing the course after passing 10+2. In the complaint, there is absolute silence about the victims involving her family and her parents to pursue the marriage proposal. Instead of the victim on her own visited the home of the accused.”
The Court further noted “So far as the allegations of the victim handing over the money to purchase a car is concerned, the victim does not tell the source from where she obtained such a huge amount and it was not her case that she was a working girl. Both the boy and girl were grown-up adults at the time. Even when for the first time they established coitus. They knew what they were doing. At this stage for the purpose of bail, to put the entire blame on the boy would be Stretching too far.”
Regarding the petitioners concealing the identity and alluring the victim, the Court said this fact “needs to be established during the trial and further incarceration of the petitioner would cause injustice merely on these uncorroborated allegations.”
Lastly, the Court said that an analysis of entire evidence does not justify further incarceration of the accused. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the stage of the investigation and the period of incarceration already undergone would make out a case for bail.
Condition on Bail, the petitioner has been directed that:-
- The petitioner shall not contact the victim through any medium. He shall neither stare, stalk, make any gestures, remarks, calls, contact, message the victim, either physically, or through phone call or any other social media, nor roam around the victim’s house.
- The petitioner shall surrender all firearms along with ammunition if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within 30 days from the date.