Karnataka HC Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Sexually Abusing, Forcing Married Woman To Convert To Islam
The court ruled that it was not appropriate to grant bail considering the seriousness of the offence alleged
The Karnataka High Court’s Dharwad bench recently refused to grant bail to Rafiq, accused of sexually abusing a married woman, unlawfully confining her, and coercing her to convert to Islam.
Justice S Rachaiah, while dismissing the bail plea, termed the actions of the accused/appellant “unpardonable" and noted that “forcing men or women to convert from one religion to another is a serious issue and stringent action is needed in such cases".
related stories
The court was hearing an appeal filed under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the judgment of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi.
According to the prosecution, the complainant, a married woman who had been running a grocery shop with her mother-in-law, alleged that the accused, Rafiq, had frequently visited the shop and befriended her. He allegedly promised to help her secure employment through his political connections, gradually developed a relationship with her, and engaged in sexual intercourse with her.
The woman’s husband had eventually learnt of the relationship, which led to conflicts between them. She had subsequently left her husband and moved in with her parents. However, Rafiq had allegedly blackmailed her into continuing their relationship. She had stayed with him for four months before moving to a rented house, where he was accused of raping her.
The chargesheet further alleged that the accused had arranged for a woman to monitor the victim’s movements and had pressurised her to convert to Islam and marry him. On April 15, 2024, her husband found her, after which she had filed a complaint with the police.
In his bail plea, the accused contended that the victim was a mature lady who had voluntarily stayed with him for several months without lodging any complaint, indicating a consensual relationship. It was also argued that his further custody was unnecessary as the chargesheet had already been filed.
The complainant, however, opposed the bail plea, arguing that if the bail is granted to the appellant, he would threaten the prosecution witnesses and hamper the court proceedings.
On examination of the parties’ contentions, the court emphasised that the allegations were serious and required strict legal intervention. It noted: “On going through the averments of the chargesheet, it appears that the appellant herein had confined the victim by keeping a woman to watch her movements and forcing her to convert to Islam."
The court underscored the need to ensure the victim’s safety and the proper conduct of the trial and concluded that “it is not appropriate to grant bail to the appellant till completion of the evidence of the victim".
Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, and the accused was ordered to remain in judicial custody pending trial.
- Location :
- First Published: