Facts of the Case

This case involved allegations of sexual harassment and exploitation of a woman employed as a dancer in an orchestra party. The accused, an organizer of the orchestra, was booked under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including Section 64 (Rape), Section 332(b) (House-trespass in order to commit an offence), Section 352 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace), and Section 351(3) (Criminal intimidation).

According to the victim, the accused molested her and later threatened her with rape and murder. The accused was arrested in October of the preceding year. Seeking release, he filed a bail application before the Allahabad High Court.

Contention of the Petitioner (Accused)

The petitioner, represented by his counsel, contended that he was falsely implicated in the case. The accused claimed that the complainant had borrowed ₹25,000 from him but had failed to repay the amount. To evade her liability, the complainant allegedly lodged the FIR against him as an act of retaliation.

Further, the petitioner argued that the accusations were baseless and lacked substantive evidence. The counsel maintained that the allegations were motivated by personal vendetta and were an attempt to misuse the legal process.

Contention of the Respondent (Prosecution)

Opposing the bail application, the Additional Government Advocate (AGA), representing the state, argued that the allegations against the accused were serious and substantiated. The victim, employed as a dancer in the orchestra party organized by the accused, was in a vulnerable position, making her particularly susceptible to exploitation.

The prosecution emphasized the gravity of the allegations, as detailed in the victim’s FIR and her subsequent statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNS. These statements were consistent and highlighted the accused’s heinous acts. The AGA further contended that granting bail to the accused in such a case would undermine justice and embolden perpetrators of gender-based violence.

Court’s Observations

Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh, presiding over the case, noted the systemic challenges faced by women artists in professions such as orchestras. The Court observed that such women often encounter societal prejudice and harassment, which strip them of their dignity and perpetuate violence against them.

The Court underscored the importance of respecting the dignity of artists and ensuring a safe workplace for them. It emphasized that women artists, particularly those in vulnerable professions, must be allowed to perform and express themselves freely, without fear of harassment or exploitation. Organizers of events, such as the accused in this case, bear a heightened responsibility to create and maintain such an environment.

The Court further noted that the victim’s statements in the FIR and under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNS were consistent, and there were no contradictions in her narrative that could weaken the prosecution’s case. The prima facie evidence against the accused was compelling and established a case of sexual harassment and intimidation.

Additionally, the Court described this case as a grim reminder of the prevalence of sexual violence and exploitation faced by women in society, particularly those in professions where they are vulnerable to abuse.

Court’s Order

Based on its observations, the Allahabad High Court denied bail to the accused organizer. The Court reasoned that the victim’s consistent statements and the severity of the allegations necessitated rejecting the bail application. The Court also stressed that granting bail in such a case could have negative societal implications, as it would undermine the judicial commitment to addressing gender-based violence and ensuring justice for victims.