Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Rajasthan Gang Rape Case, Orders Accused to Surrender

The Supreme Court of India recently delivered a crucial judgment in the case of Bhagwan Singh v. Dilip Kumar @ Deepu @ Deepak & Another, involving a serious offense of gang rape, extortion, and threats against a minor girl. The case revolved around the High Court of Rajasthan’s order granting bail to the accused, which the Supreme Court subsequently cancelled due to serious concerns about witness intimidation and procedural lapses.

Background of the Case

The case originated in Dausa, Rajasthan, where a minor girl was allegedly drugged, gang-raped, and blackmailed by the accused. The complaint was filed by her uncle on March 25, 2022, leading to the registration of FIR No. 94 of 2022. The charges included:

Section 376D of the IPC – Gang Rape
Section 384 of the IPC – Extortion
Section 506 of the IPC – Criminal Intimidation
Section 326 of the POCSO Act – Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses
Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act – Atrocities against Scheduled Castes and Tribes
Section 66 of the IT Act – Cyber Crime

The key events in the legal timeline were:

February 24, 2021: The alleged incident occurred at Samleti Palace Hotel, Mandawar Road, Mahwa.
March 25, 2022: FIR No. 94 of 2022 was registered.
April 2022: The accused Vivek and Netram were arrested, but Deepak was left out of the charge sheet.
June 9, 2022: The trial court took cognizance against Deepak.
July 13, 2022: The Rajasthan High Court dismissed Deepak’s petition challenging his inclusion in the charge sheet.
April 6, 2023: The High Court granted bail to the accused Deepak and Netram.
August 23, 2023: The Supreme Court cancelled the bail order.

Key Legal Issues Considered

The Supreme Court examined:

Whether the High Court erred in granting bail despite strong evidence against the accused.
Whether witness intimidation and influence of the accused justified the cancellation of bail.
Whether procedural lapses in the investigation affected the fairness of the trial.
Whether the delay in filing the FIR impacted the case.

Arguments by the Appellant (Complainant)

The complainant’s counsel argued:

The victim had repeatedly named Deepak in her statements under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC, yet he was left out of the charge sheet.
The accused tampered with hotel records by deleting CCTV footage and removing entries from the hotel register.
The victim’s father, a police constable, was threatened to withdraw the case.
The accused Deepak is the son of a sitting MLA and had significant influence over the proceedings.
The delay in lodging the FIR was due to constant threats from the accused.

Arguments by the Respondents (Accused)

The accused’s counsel countered:

The delay in filing the FIR (13 months after the alleged incident) created doubts about the credibility of the case.
The victim was found to be present at school on the day of the alleged crime, based on school records.
The accused Deepak had no call records or known relationship with the victim.
The charges were politically motivated to target Deepak’s father, a sitting MLA.
The victim’s mother had earlier filed another FIR (No. 142 of 2021) for theft against Vivek, but rape was not mentioned.

Supreme Court’s Analysis and Judgment

1. Strong Evidence Against the Accused

The Court held that:

“The prosecutrix has made allegations against the concerned accused-respondents, and it becomes amply clear from the plain reading of the complaint as well as the testimony of the prosecutrix that the accused persons had indeed participated in the gang rape.”

2. Influence of the Accused and Witness Intimidation

The Court noted that Deepak’s political influence could affect the fairness of the trial:

“The fact that accused Deepak is the son of a sitting MLA would disclose the domineering influence he would wield, not only in delaying the proceedings but also in pressurizing the witnesses.”

3. Procedural Lapses and Omission of Accused

The Court found it suspicious that Deepak was initially left out of the charge sheet despite being named in the FIR:

“The prosecutrix had also named Deepak in her FIR and statements, yet he was dropped from the charge sheet. It is only on the strength of an application filed by the complainant that the trial court took cognizance.”

4. Delay in Filing FIR Not Fatal

The Court ruled that the delay was justified due to the threats posed by the accused:

“In the background of the threats posed by the accused, the delay in filing the complaint does not vitiate the case.”

Supreme Court’s Final Decision

The Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted by the High Court:

The accused must surrender within two weeks.
If they fail to surrender, the police must take them into custody.
The accused can apply for bail only after key witnesses depose.
The High Court must reconsider bail applications based on the progress of the trial.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision reinforces key legal principles:

Political influence cannot override justice: The accused’s status must not affect the fairness of the trial.
Intimidation of witnesses is a serious concern: Courts must prevent accused persons from interfering with evidence.
Delays in FIR registration do not automatically nullify cases: Circumstances such as threats must be considered.
Bail must be granted judiciously: Courts should weigh the potential risks of granting bail, especially in heinous crimes.

This judgment sets a strong precedent against the misuse of power and influence to evade justice.

Petitioner Name: Bhagwan Singh.
Respondent Name: Dilip Kumar @ Deepu @ Deepak & Another.
Judgment By: Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, Justice Aravind Kumar.
Place Of Incident: Dausa, Rajasthan.
Judgment Date: 23-08-2023.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: bhagwan-singh-vs-dilip-kumar-@-deepu-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-23-08-2023.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in SC/ST Act Case
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Judgment by S Ravindra Bhat
See all petitions in Judgment by Aravind Kumar
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Stayed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments August 2023
See all petitions in 2023 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category