Tattoo On Woman's Hand Forces Delhi High Court To Grant Bail To Rape Accused

Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar, who pronounced the order on Friday, said: “Moreover, it is also not easy to make such a tattoo which is on the forearm of the complainant if there is some resistance from the other side.”

(Representative Image/Getty)

New Delhi: Observing that “making of tattoo is an art and special machine is required for the same”, the Delhi High Court has granted bail to a rape accused against whom one of the allegations is that he forcefully engraved his name on the woman’s forearm during her captivity at his house. 

Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar, who pronounced the order on Friday, said: “Moreover, it is also not easy to make such a tattoo which is on the forearm of the complainant if there is some resistance from the other side.”

“It is not everybody’s job and it is also not the case of the prosecutrix that the petitioner had anything to do with the tattoo business,” he added.

The woman met the accused in connection with mortgaging of a property in 2016 as per the case registered under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC in 2020.

He allegedly gave her a cold drink on September 29, 2016, following which she lost consciousness. 

When she regained consciousness, he allegedly showed her “nude” photos and videos of her and then allegedly blackmailed to have physical relations with him. She told the police that it continued till May 2019.

The accused’s counsel told the High Court he has remained in judicial custody since June 23, 2020, and has been falsely implicated.

The counsel said the woman, who is married, was in a consensual relation with the accused, adding her love towards him was evident from the fact that she has got his name tattooed on her forearm. 

The High Court was told that she sent the photograph of the tattoo to his email on two occasions. The counsel claimed the case was registered only when she failed to convince him to maintain ties.

The court said the prosecutrix kept quiet for three years and did not make any complaint against the accused and did not inform her husband either. 

The High Court while commenting on the allegations that the girl was confined in the house by the accused last year said the chargesheet reveals the said house was taken on rent by the complainant herself, adding enquiries from the landlord revealed she was residing alone in the said house.

The High Court also said the status report filed by the police reveals there were no recording of threats as alleged by the woman and, therefore, her mobile was not seized.