New Delhi: A doctor, accused of raping another doctor promising marriage, has been granted bail by a Delhi court, which said both were major and educated and were expected to have understood the consequence of their relationship.
Special judge O.P. Saini granted relief to the accused on a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with a surety of like amount, noting that it was a “symmetrical” relationship between them and the accused was not in any “advantageous position”.
The court noted the text messages exchanged between the two and said these indicated that “the prosecutrix was a willing partner in the relation”. It, however, directed the accused not try to contact the alleged victim or threaten her or tamper evidence.
Observing that the woman had an understanding of all consequences, the court said: “Both parties are major and educated and as such are expected to have understood the consequences of their relationship. The printouts of the text messages exchanged between the duo indicate that she was a willing partner in the relationship…. The text messages continued to be exchanged between the duo till January 24, 2018.
The court said the material on record indicated the accused had taken money from the woman, which he had returned. Similarly, the prosecutrix also took money from him and a cheque issued by her to him returned dishonoured on March 20, 2018, it said.
“Material on record indicates that it was a symmetrical relationship between the two parties and the accused was not in any advantageous position.”
The prosecution case was she and the accused were doctors and they met online in February 2017. Later, when he proposed marriage, both started living together in Vasant Kunj where he was working at a private hospital. The prosecution said during this time, he established sexual relationship with her. An FIR was lodged on these allegations on March 24, 2018 at Police Station Vasant Kunj (South).
The prosecutrix gave in writing she had settled all her disputes with the accused, which she is denying on the plea that the same was done by her under pressure of the accused.”
The court said there was “no misconception about the relationship either in the mind of the accused or in the mind of the prosecutrix, which is clear from the text messages exchanged between them from February 2017 to January 2018 and run into about hundred pages.”
