Posted:
HIGHLIGHTS
The court said it was to be noted that while Nanda remembered the entire incident, she did not remember the date and month in which it happened
"In view of all these facts the possibility cannot be ruled out that the applicant has falsely been enroped in the crime, judge SS Oza said
MUMBAI: In a 15-page order allowing actor Alok Nath's plea for pre-arrest bail in a rape case filed by writer-director Vinta Nanda, a sessions court has observed that "the possibility cannot be ruled out that he has falsely been enroped in the crime.
The court said it was to be noted that while Nanda remembered the entire incident, she did not remember the date and month in which it happened. "In view of all these facts the possibility cannot be ruled out that the applicant has falsely been enroped in the crime, judge SS Oza said.
Nanda filed a case in October 2018 after she first publicly alleged, when the #MeToo movement gained momentum in India, that the actor had raped her more than once 19 years ago. Referring to the delay in registering the FIR, the court said there was no period of limitations prescribed for offences punishable under Sections 376 (rape) and 377 (unnatural sexual offences) of the Indian Penal Code. However, the court said there was nothing on record to show Nath threatened her or made any promise for not lodging a report, the report showed Nanda had not lodged the report immediately after the alleged incident for her own benefit. "So far as the reason to delay in lodging the FIR is concerned, the complainant stated in the report itself that she consulted with her friends regarding lodging of report but they told her that applicant is a big actor and her all companies (sic) were already shut, therefore no one would believe her story, hence she did not file complaint against the applicant, the court observed.
The court also said since both the accused and complainant were married (separately), a medical examination would be a mere formality and no useful purpose would be served by it. It said the actor's custodial interrogation was also not necessary. "It is to be noted that (the) incident took place at the house of (the) complainant, therefore no possibility to destroy the evidence, the court said.
The order said while Nanda had sent a detailed police complaint in writing on October 17, 2018 for registration of FIR, on the basis of a second report dated November 20, 2018, the FIR was registered against Nath. The court said prima facie, it was revealed that there is some variance in the two complaints. "However, whether same would amount to omission or contradiction is a matter of trial, the court said.
During arguments for relief, Nath's lawyer had contended that perhaps the complainant's allegations were inspired by the unrequited and unreciprocated love and affection she had for the actor.
Opposing his anticipatory bail plea, Nanda's advocate had told the court that being ultra-modern and having alcohol did not give Nath the right or licence to rape and brutalise. Further, it was said the first complaint filed by her was only a cover letter with an attachment of a photocopy of the post she had put up on Facebook on October 8, 2018. She said while her post took only about five to ten minutes, the statement recorded by police was in detail and took about five hours. "The details provided to the police are the same as what was written in the complaint. It could be that that during translation of her statement from English or Hindi to Marathi, those details were omitted and overlooked, she said regarding Nath's allegations of discrepancies in statements. Nanda also alleged Nath was making false and vague remarks to mislead the court and the attempt was to ruin her character and image.
Granting anticipatory bail on a surety of Rs5 lakh, the court said Nath was not to visit the vicinity of Nanda's house. "He shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected, the court said.
comment:
p_commentcount