Court denies anticipatory bail to man, accused of raping woman on pretext of marriage
|
By Our Staff Reporter
IMPHAL, Jun 20 : The Additional Sessions Judge of Fast Track Court, Manipur East today rejected the anticipatory bail application of a 24-year-old man in connection with an FIR registered at Imphal police station over allegations of repeated sexual exploitation of a woman on the pretext of marriage.
The anticipatory bail plea was filed by Elvis Soubam, son of Salaikhomba Singh of Sega Road, Khwairakpam Leikai, through his counsel.
The petitioner claimed innocence, stating that he has been falsely implicated.
It was further submitted that he and the alleged victim were in a consensual romantic relationship and that the FIR arose out of a failed relationship and subsequent misunderstanding between the parties.
It was also submitted that the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation as and when required.
The defence argued that custodial interrogation is unnecessary and that the petitioner deserves protection from arrest.
On the other hand, the Public Prosecutor and counsel assisting the prosecution on behalf of the victim strongly opposed the plea.
The prosecution alleged that the petitioner induced the victim into a sexual relationship on the promise of marriage, while concealing material facts regarding his prior engagement and relationship with another woman.
It was further alleged that he recorded intimate videos of the victim and used them to emotionally blackmail and coerce her.
The prosecution stated that the victim was taken to the petitioner’s residence, where she was allegedly subjected to humiliation, intimidation, and mistreatment by co-accused persons. The counsel assisting the prosecution also submitted that the investigation is at a crucial stage, with several electronic devices, digital communications, social media records, and alleged video recordings yet to be recovered and examined.
It was argued that custodial interrogation is necessary for effective investigation and that granting anticipatory bail could lead to tampering with electronic evidence and influencing of witnesses.
After hearing the submissions of the Public Prosecutor, counsel for the victim, and counsel for the petitioner, the Court observed that the allegations are not confined to a mere failed relationship or breach of promise to marry.
The FIR includes allegations of repeated sexual exploitation on the assurance of marriage, concealment of material facts, recording and retention of intimate videos, criminal intimidation, and emotional coercion.
It noted that the investigation is still in progress and recovery and forensic examination of electronic evidence remain incomplete.
Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the need for recovery and examination of electronic evidence, and the possibility of interference with the investigation, the Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application and vacated the interim protection earlier granted to the petitioner.
IMPHAL, Jun 20 : The Additional Sessions Judge of Fast Track Court, Manipur East today rejected the anticipatory bail application of a 24-year-old man in connection with an FIR registered at Imphal police station over allegations of repeated sexual exploitation of a woman on the pretext of marriage.
The anticipatory bail plea was filed by Elvis Soubam, son of Salaikhomba Singh of Sega Road, Khwairakpam Leikai, through his counsel.
The petitioner claimed innocence, stating that he has been falsely implicated.
It was further submitted that he and the alleged victim were in a consensual romantic relationship and that the FIR arose out of a failed relationship and subsequent misunderstanding between the parties.
It was also submitted that the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation as and when required.
The defence argued that custodial interrogation is unnecessary and that the petitioner deserves protection from arrest.
On the other hand, the Public Prosecutor and counsel assisting the prosecution on behalf of the victim strongly opposed the plea.
The prosecution alleged that the petitioner induced the victim into a sexual relationship on the promise of marriage, while concealing material facts regarding his prior engagement and relationship with another woman.
It was further alleged that he recorded intimate videos of the victim and used them to emotionally blackmail and coerce her.
The prosecution stated that the victim was taken to the petitioner’s residence, where she was allegedly subjected to humiliation, intimidation, and mistreatment by co-accused persons. The counsel assisting the prosecution also submitted that the investigation is at a crucial stage, with several electronic devices, digital communications, social media records, and alleged video recordings yet to be recovered and examined.
It was argued that custodial interrogation is necessary for effective investigation and that granting anticipatory bail could lead to tampering with electronic evidence and influencing of witnesses.
After hearing the submissions of the Public Prosecutor, counsel for the victim, and counsel for the petitioner, the Court observed that the allegations are not confined to a mere failed relationship or breach of promise to marry.
The FIR includes allegations of repeated sexual exploitation on the assurance of marriage, concealment of material facts, recording and retention of intimate videos, criminal intimidation, and emotional coercion.
It noted that the investigation is still in progress and recovery and forensic examination of electronic evidence remain incomplete.
Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the need for recovery and examination of electronic evidence, and the possibility of interference with the investigation, the Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application and vacated the interim protection earlier granted to the petitioner.