Twitter
Advertisement

Bombay high court notice to Sunil Paraskar in model's rape case

Latest News
article-main
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

The Bombay high court on Friday issued notice to suspended deputy inspector general of police Sunil Paraskar on a petition by a model seeking cancellation of his anticipatory bail. The model had alleged that the police officer had raped her.

Justice Sadhana Jadhav issued notice to Paraskar and kept the model's petition for arguments on December 3.

The Special Women's Court had granted anticipatory bail to Paraskar in August saying that his custodial interrogation was not required.

The model had moved the HC through MZM Legal firm alleging that the suspended officer had violated conditions imposed on him and had threatened her lawyer. She further contended that the special judge wrongly cast aspersions on her character, thereby negating all her allegations as false and void.

The petition alleges that after obtaining anticipatory bail, someone had, on behalf of Paraskar, threatened her lawyer to withdraw the case. the person had even allegedly offered a bribe of Rs10 lakh to the lawyer.

Seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail order, the petition states that the order of the special judge is "perverse, illegal, unjust and in violation of equity, fair play, good conscience, rule of prudence and principles of natural justice".

The model's petition reads: "Respondent no. 2 (Paraskar) is a high-ranking police official who has all means, power and position to influence and tamper evidence and hence he was not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. In fact instances of threatening witnesses, tampering with witnesses being her earlier lawyer and present lawyer, not cooperating with investigating were all substantiated and presented before the Learned (Special) Judge."

Seeking cancellation of Paraskar's anticipatory bail, the petition expresses apprehension that he would threaten her (model) as well as the witnesses and would ultimately obstruct the police investigation and may also prejudice the right of the applicant to have a fair trial.

Terming the trial court's order as perverse, the petition says that it has used the reasoning of "victim blaming" by holding the model responsible for the said crime. "In the present context, the Ld. Sessions judge has referred to the submissive and presumed promiscuous attitude of the applicant that allegedly encouraged the assault," reads the petition.

She has further added: "The Ld. Sessions judge failed to observe that in a rape case it is always the perpetrator who is responsible for the act of rape or sexual assault. As such, abuse of alcohol, presumption of consent and inability to control sexual desires cannot be used as an excuse to shift liability and responsibility to the victim of rape."

The story so far
A 25-year-old model, has alleged that Paraskar, 57, molested and sexually assaulted her on two occasions in December 2013.

According to her, she had met Paraskar first in 2012, when he was additional commissioner of police, with regard to a case.

A first information report (FIR) was registered against him by Malwani police under sections 376(2) (rape by a police officer), 376 C (intercourse by superintendent of jail, remand home, etc.) and 354(D) (stalking) of the Indian Penal Code.

Following this, Paraskar had filed an anticipatory bail application before the special judge.

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement