Accused Allegedly Induced Consent Under False Pretenses, Suppressed Marital Status, and Made Objectionable Content Viral
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has denied anticipatory bail to Abhijit Arun Gade, who stands accused of serious offenses, including rape under false pretenses and violations of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The court, presided over by Justice Shyam C. Chandak, emphasized the gravity of the allegations and the necessity for custodial interrogation to ensure a thorough investigation.
The case, which has garnered considerable attention, involves allegations that Gade, by promising work in a film, induced the victim to consent to a physical relationship. The court noted that Gade suppressed his marital status and later made objectionable photos and videos of the victim viral on social media platforms.
The prosecution argued that Gade misled the victim, identified as Respondent No.2, by offering her a potential role in a film, thereby obtaining her consent for a physical relationship under false pretenses. It was further alleged that Gade concealed his marriage, only revealing his status after the relationship had developed, leading to domestic disputes and ultimately, the dissemination of private content without consent.
Counsel for Gade contended that the relationship was consensual and that the allegations lacked substance, particularly in light of claims that Gade had deleted the incriminating content. However, the court found that the seriousness of the offenses, combined with the need to collect electronic evidence, necessitated custodial interrogation.
The judgment highlighted the impact of the alleged offenses on the victim, emphasizing that the misuse of trust and the viral spread of private content constituted a prima facie case of rape. The court concluded that granting bail would impede the investigation's integrity, particularly in securing digital evidence.
This decision underscores the judiciary's stance on protecting victim rights in cases involving digital privacy violations and deceitful inducements for consent.
Bottom line:-
Anticipatory bail was denied to the accused who allegedly committed rape by inducing the victim's consent for physical relations on the false pretext of offering her work in a film, suppressed his marital status, and made objectionable photos/videos of the victim viral on social media.
Statutory provision(s): Information Technology Act, 2000 Sections 66E, 67A, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 69
Abhijit Arun Gade v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay) : Law Finder Doc id # 2913062
