Delhi HC Refuses To Grant Anticipatory Bail to woman who allegedly threatened to file false rape case
The Delhi High Court recently denied to grant anticipatory bail to a woman who allegedly threatened a man with false rape allegations with a view to extort money from him.
Justice Subramonium Prasad also observed that a reading of the first information report (FIR) showed that it was a case of ‘honey-trap’.
Rishab Jain had alleged that he was invited to the accused’s house by her boyfriend.
He was then offered with a drink by the woman following which he became unconscious. After that, he woke up to find the woman touching him inappropriately.
The court opined, "the reading of FIR shows that this is case of honey trap. The allegation against the petitioner is that she has threatened the complainant and demanded money. Material on record also shows that only when the complainant had filed the instant FIR, did the woman file a complaint under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against him."
The woman had filed a plea for the grant of anticipatory bail after an FIR came to be registered against her for offences under Sections 328 and 389 (putting person in fear of accusation of offence, in order to commit extortion) of the IPC.
Judgment highlighted the necessary parameters, are as follows:
The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused ; the court has also to take into account reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant; the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a court in respect of any cognizable offence; the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; the possibility of the accused’s repeating similar or other offences.