The Court observed that relationships at workplaces often become sour and lead to criminal cases.
The Delhi High Court on Monday granted bail to a man accused of rape, causing hurt, criminal intimidation, outraging a woman’s modesty, and engaging in unnatural sexual intercourse, as alleged by his female colleague.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that workplace relationships can deteriorate, occasionally leading to criminal allegations. She stressed the importance of courts distinguishing between rape and consensual sexual relations.
“In the present times, many a times close proximity at workplace results in consensual relationships which on turning sour, get reported as crimes, making it pertinent to be conscious of the distinction between the offence of rape and consensual sex between two adults,” the Court observed.
Justice Krishna underscored the importance of protecting women in workplaces while emphasizing the need for courts to exercise careful discretion in such matters.
“…when women are emerging and becoming a relevant part of the work force, it becomes the responsibility of Legislature as well as the Executive to enact laws and implement them so as to ensure their safety and well being. The Courts have an equal corresponding responsibility to interpret and apply the laws pragmatically to given situations to ensure that the protection of law is a reality and not merely a paper protection. However, a more onerous duty lies on the Courts to also be a watchdog to apply an even hand and deal with a given situation in a manner to prevent its abuse and misuse by any person.”
The complainant and the bail applicant shared a consensual romantic and physical relationship, with plans to marry.
“Even on a few occasions the Prosecutrix insisted to go to OYO Hotels even though Applicant was evasive for the same. During such stays, she voluntarily produced her Identity Card and did not raise any concerns or made any complaint of any alleged misconduct to the police or any other authority, which demonstrates that their physical relationship was with mutual consent, free-will and love,” the order recorded.
The applicant asserted that after learning about the complainant’s involvement with another person, he tried to address the situation. However, she ended all contact with him and later, out of revenge, filed a criminal case against him, he contended.
The Court observed that charges have been framed in the case and that the applicant has been in custody since May 2024. While granting bail, it stated:
“The veracity of allegations levelled against the Applicant shall be tried during trial which is likely to take some time. The Applicant is in judicial custody since 30.05.2024. No fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the Applicant behind bars for an inordinate long time.”
As a condition of bail, the applicant was required to stay away from both the complainant’s residence and workplace.
