‘Victim Responsible: Allahabad High Court Sparks Massive Outrage With Bail Order For Rapist

Prayagraj: In yet another controversial bail order that has drawn sharp criticism from legal experts and rights activists, the Allahabad High Court has granted bail to a man accused of raping a college student, observing that the victim had "herself invited trouble" and was "responsible" for the alleged sexual assault.

The survivor, a college student, alleged that the accused raped her twice at his relative’s apartment after they met at a bar. In her complaint, she stated that she had agreed to accompany him to the residence to rest, as she was heavily intoxicated and needed assistance after consuming alcohol.  

While granting bail, the single-judge bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh questioned the victim’s conduct, making a controversial observation that has triggered widespread outrage.

“This Court is of the view that even if the allegation of the victim is accepted as true, then it can also be concluded that she herself invited trouble and was also responsible for the same,” Justice Singh noted in the order.

The court also cited inconsistencies in the medical examination as a reason for granting relief to the accused. “In her medical examination, her hymen was found torn, but the doctor did not give any opinion about the sexual assault,” the court observed.

The bench further observed that, as a postgraduate (MA) student, the victim was sufficiently mature to understand the "morality and significance of her act," as stated in her FIR.

Seeking bail in the case, the accused approached the High Court, where his counsel contended that even if the allegations made in the FIR are accepted as true, the matter does not constitute rape but appears to be a case of consensual relations between the parties involved.

The defence further argued that the accused had been in custody since December 2024, had no prior criminal record, and assured that if granted bail, he would not misuse the liberty and would fully cooperate in ensuring the timely conclusion of the trial.

On the other hand, the Additional Government Advocate, representing the State, opposed the bail plea in light of the FIR’s contents, although he did not challenge the factual assertions presented by the defence.

After considering the arguments presented, the court granted bail to the accused, stating, "Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.”

A Look at Five Controversial Rulings by the Allahabad High Court

‘Grabbing Breast Not Attempt to Rape’: In a widely debated ruling, the Allahabad High Court held that actions such as grabbing a woman’s breast or pulling the string of her pyjamas did not amount to an attempt to rape. The decision drew criticism for seemingly downplaying acts of sexual aggression.

The Ayodhya Land Dispute (2010):  In a landmark judgment, the court ordered that the disputed land in Ayodhya be divided into three parts: one for the Hindu parties advocating for the Ram Temple, another for the Sunni Waqf Board for a mosque, and a third for the Nirmohi Akhara. The verdict attempted a compromise but sparked controversy for treating a sensitive religious matter like a property dispute.

Ganga-Yamuna Pollution Verdict (2018): The High Court directed the central and state governments to take immediate action to clean the Ganga and Yamuna rivers. While the judgment made headlines, it was criticized for lacking clear implementation mechanisms and failing to hold authorities accountable. Many viewed it as symbolic rather than solution-driven.

Role in the Nirbhaya Case Proceedings: Although the Nirbhaya gang rape case was primarily handled by the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court, the Allahabad High Court played a role in related appeals and petitions filed by the accused. It faced backlash for procedural delays and the slow pace of hearings.

Hijab and Dress Code Ruling (2018): In a contentious decision, the court upheld a college’s denial of admission to a Muslim student for wearing a hijab, stating that wearing the headscarf was not an essential religious practice. The verdict raised concerns about religious freedom and institutional overreach.