Daijiworld Media Network- New Delhi
New Delhi, May 28: In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Wednesday granted interim bail to a 23-year-old social media influencer accused of raping a 40-year-old woman, observing that he had been behind bars for nine months without charges being framed.
A bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma questioned the Delhi Police’s basis for invoking Section 376 (rape) of the IPC, pointing out that the woman had voluntarily accompanied the accused on multiple occasions, including seven visits to Jammu.
“She is not a baby. A single hand can’t clap. Why have you invoked Section 376 when they travelled together to Jammu?” the bench remarked, taking a stern view of the prolonged judicial custody without progress in framing charges.
The top court further directed that the accused be produced before the trial court and granted interim bail under strict conditions. The bench instructed that he must not misuse his liberty or attempt to contact the complainant.
During the hearing, the bench also questioned the influence wielded by social media figures, asking rhetorically, “Who gets influenced by such people?”
The accused had approached the apex court challenging the Delhi High Court's earlier refusal to grant bail, citing the gravity of the allegations.
As per the FIR, the woman had first interacted with the accused in 2021 while seeking a social media influencer to promote her clothing brand. Their relationship allegedly turned sour over a financial dispute involving an iPhone, and later, a series of troubling incidents unfolded.
In her complaint, the woman alleged that the accused had visited her residence in Noida, drugged her during a trip to Connaught Place, and took her to a secluded location where he sexually assaulted her. She further accused him of repeated sexual abuse, extortion, and threats over the following two and a half years.
The FIR has been registered under Sections 376, 354, 323, 506, 509, and 34 of the IPC.
While granting interim relief, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of not criminalising consensual actions without due evidence, even as it upheld the seriousness of the allegations for further legal scrutiny.