Indian women will not normally concoct false story of rape: Manipur High Court

Indian woman will not normally concoct a false story and allege rape for blackmail or revenge, the Manipur High Court observed while denying anticipatory bail to four college officials accused of kidnapping and raping one of their students [Yumnam Surjit Kumar Singh vs The Officer-in-Charge and Anr.].Justice MV Muralidaran stated that given the feelings of disgust, embarrassment and shame as well as lifelong trauma faced by a sexual assault survivor, it is unlikely that they would rope in somebody falsely in a rape case."The stigma that attaches to the survivor of rape in Indian society ordinarily rules out the levelling of false accusations. An Indian woman traditionally will not concoct an untruthful story and bring charges of rape for the purpose of blackmail, hatred, spite or revenge," the Court said..According to the prosecution, the survivor was picked up by two teachers from her house for a picnic where other students and teachers were present as well. It was alleged that on the way back, she was administered an intoxicant by the two teachers, while the third accused drove the car. Further, it was alleged that the three dropped her off at the house of the prime accused, the college's Managing Director, where he raped her while she was unconscious..On the other hand, the applicants claimed that the prime accused and the survivor had been in a romantic relationship for five years before they decided to elope on the day of the picnic to get married. They also claimed that on the next day, the survivor along with the accused visited her house to perform a matrimonial ceremony where the survivor's sister suddenly started beating her and subsequently convinced her to file a false case. Thus, they sought anticipatory bail.The police informed the Court that despite multiple attempts, the four accused were evading arrest and had to be treated as proclaimed offenders. They also opposed the bail applications. .The Court observed that the materials produced and statements of witnesses, including that of the survivor's, prima facie established that the prime accused conspired with his subordinate staff, kidnapped the survivor and raped her."The prima facie material also establishes that the petitioner Surjitkumar had committed a heinous crime against his own student and thus it is a blot on the student-teacher relationship, which deserves no leniency," it added.Further, the Court noted that the Supreme Court in Lavesh v. State held that when an accused is 'absconding' or is a 'proclaimed offender', there is no question of granting anticipatory bail..As per Supreme Court, anticipatory bail may be granted where the court believes that the case is a false one.However, the Court concluded that given our conservative society, a woman will not put her reputation in peril by falsely alleging sexual assault. "Time and again, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the important thing that the Court has to bear in mind is that what is lost by a rape survivor is face. The survivor loses value as a person. Ours is a conservative society and, therefore, a woman and more so a young woman will not put her reputation in peril by alleging falsely about forcible sexual assault," it stated..Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the possibility of the accused of repeating similar or other offences, impact on public if bail is granted, and the fact that the accused were evading arrest, the Court refused to grant them anticipatory bail..[Read Judgment]