‘Be Careful’: Supreme Court Slams Allahabad HC Over Remark That Rape Victim ‘Invited Trouble’

‘Be Careful’: The Supreme Court on Tuesday slammed an Allahabad high court order that stated the rape survivor “herself invited trouble”.

While recently granting bail to an accused in a rape case, the Allahabad High Court said the complainant had "invited trouble" upon herself. The comment was made by Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh.

A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih strongly objected to a recent remark by the High Court, which suggested the woman had invited trouble and was responsible for the alleged rape.

Also Read: When Anushka Sharma Said Ranveer Singh ‘Can’t Be a Boyfriend’ and Explained Why She Couldn’t Date Him

Justice Gavai also wondered why the High Court judge had felt it necessary to make any remark; it was made as the court granted bail to a man accused of raping a minor.

"There is another order now by another judge. Yes, bail can be granted, but what is this discussion that she herself invited trouble, etc. One has to be careful when saying such things especially on this side (judges)," Justice Gavai said.

" One thing here and there,” he said as quoted by Bar and Bench.

Also Read: MS Dhoni Admits ‘Putting Too Much Pressure on Ashwin’ After Dropping Him from CSK XI vs LSG

The Supreme Court made the remarks while hearing a suo motu case it had initiated in connection with a separate matter, where the Allahabad High Court ruled that acts such as groping a child victim, breaking the string of her pyjama, and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert did not amount to rape or attempted rape. The bench has adjourned the hearing of the suo motu case for four weeks.

This incident comes just days after another controversial observation by the same high court was stayed by the Supreme Court. On March 26, the top court halted an order which had ruled that grabbing a woman’s breasts and pulling the drawstring of her “pyjama” did not amount to attempted rape. The apex court described the judgment as "totally insensitive" and reflecting an “inhuman approach.”

“In normal circumstances, we are slow in granting stay at this stage. But since the observations appearing in paragraphs 21, 24 and 26 are totally unknown to the cannons of law and depict a total insensitive and inhuman approach, we are inclined to stay the said observations,” the court had stated on March 26.

Also Read: ‘Delay, Not Denial’: Air India Responds to Vir Das’s ₹50,000 Flight Complaint Over No Wheelchair