HYDERABAD: It was an unprecedented hearing that the Telangana High Court witnessed on Thursday laced with heated arguments when it took up the anticipatory bail petition of IAS trainee Mrugender Lal Banoth who has been charged with alleged rape of a woman at the National Police Academy (NPA) ending up with photos of a woman, said to be in the buff, being circulated leaving the victim in a state of shame and helplessness.
However, on the request of the accused’s counsel that the future of the trainee officer will be at stake if he is arrested, Justice Lalitha granted 15-day interim bail ordering him to cooperate with the interrogation. The court also directed him to undergo a potency test.
The victim's implead petition requesting the court to take up her contentions, too, before granting bail led to a twist in case.
On Wednesday, Bhanoth’s counsel Devineni Radha Rani had argued that the rape case was lodged against her client as a counterblast by the victim as she was earlier booked in a case for circulating photos, allegedly in the nude, of the accused’s relative (woman) in a Telegram group she had created. The court was seeking the status of the case from the police.
On Thursday, the police told the court that the phones and other electronic equipment with the obscene photos have been seized and sent to the forensic science laboratory (FSL) and a report was awaited. The police also submitted that seven witness were also examined in the rape case and they could not take further steps due to the court’s directions not to take any coercive steps against the accused.
Soon after, victim’s counsel S. Rajagopal stated that Bhanoth and his family were trying to mislead the court by cooking up a case against the victim and that photos purportedly in circulation were of the victim herself and not of Bhanoth’s cousin’s. He also submitted that before the case was registered against his client, Bhanoth’s father and former MLA Madan Lal and his wife visited the victim at her house to work out a compromise on two occasions.
At this point, Bhanoth’s Counsel placed photos of the woman along with text messages and submitted that the victim impersonated as a male member of the Telegram group, and was forwarding photos of herself saying that it belongs to Bhanoth’s cousin.
Taking her defence further, she also quoted a Supreme Court observation that consensual sex with a promise of marriage does not amount to rape.
Victim’s Counsel Rajagopal raised an objection and said that the Bhanoth’s Counsel was indulging in character assassination leadihg to some heated arguments.
Interfering at this juncture, Justice Kanneganti Lalitha enquired with Assistant Public Prosecutor Md Vizarat about the FSL report.
The Judge also questioned Bhanoth’s Counsel as to how a woman can circulate her own obscene photos and blame others. “Does any woman do such things?” She also asked, “What is the conduct of the trainee officer? Being a IPS trainee how could he go in for consensual sex and that too a the place of training? How will he go on to serve?”
The APP submitted that the FSL report would take time but submitted that the phone number from which the photos were forwarded was not in the name of the victim. However, the police had also booked another person as the second accused who had earlier used the same number.
The APP also submitted that these two cases cannot be linked and citing a Supreme Court case said that the IAS trainee’s conduct amounts to rape and appealed to the court not to grant bail.
Giving relief to Bhanoth’s parents, the court directed the police to issue notices to the parents if their presence is required.
