Supreme Court denies bail to man accused of repeatedly raping his sister-in-law

The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal filed by a man accused of repeatedly raping his sister-in-law with the alleged connivance of her husband and father-in-law, challenging the denial of bail to him in the case.

The apex court refused to interfere with the February this year order of the Bombay High Court which had rejected the bail plea filed by the accused.

A bench headed by Justice L Nageswara Rao, hearing the matter through video-conferencing, was informed by the counsel representing the accused that the charge sheet has been filed in the case in December last year and the petitioner is in custody for nine months.

"On an overall consideration of the facts of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the high court," said the bench, also comprising Justices Krishna Murari and S Ravindra Bhat.

"However, we give liberty to the petitioner to renew his bail application after the evidence of the prosecutrix (alleged victim) is recorded," the bench said in its May 26 order.

The bench noted that the petitioner is accused of committing offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including the one related to commission of repeated rape on the same woman and also under provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

According to the police, the woman has alleged in her complaint that her brother-in-law had persistently raped her in the months of February and May 2019.

In its February this year order, the high court noted that the woman alleged that she had disclosed about this to her husband and even her father-in-law but they "turned a blind eye".

An FIR was lodged by the woman in July last year.

The counsel representing the man had claimed before the high court that allegations levelled against his client were not believable and there was delay in lodging the FIR.

The lawyer had also argued in the high court that since the husband and father-in-law of the woman have already been granted bail in the case, the man should also be released on bail on merits as well as parity.

In its order, the high court had referred to the woman's school record and noted that she was below the age of 18 years when she was allegedly subjected to forcible sexual intercourse for the first time.