A Mumbai sessions court granted anticipatory bail to a man and his family, stating his wife's claim that he had forcible intercourse with her could not be deemed "illegal." Additional Sessions Judge in Mumbai, Sanjashree J Gharat, stated that a woman's allegation does not stand up to judicial inquiry.
The woman accused her husband and his family of cruelty and claimed that she was paralysed below the waist as a result of the forced sex, which she claimed happened twice.
The judge stated that the accused "cannot be argued to commit any illegal act" because he is the husband.
The woman married on November 22 of last year, reportedly. According to the woman, following the wedding, her husband and his family began imposing restrictions on her, taunting and abusing her, and even demanding dowry.
She also claimed that a month after the wedding, her husband had sex without her consent. When the couple went to Mahableshwar on January 2, she accused him of pressuring her for sex again.
Following that, the woman claimed she became ill and went to visit a doctor who after examination informed that she had paralysis below the waist.
She then filed a cruelty case against her husband and two in-laws. The accused, on the other hand, filed an anticipatory bail plea in the sessions court in Mumbai, denying all charges.
Also Read: Jaipur man chants Gayatri mantra as doctors remove a tumour from his brain
As per reports, the woman's husband had also filed a case against her. The husband told court that family members accused by woman lived in Ratnagiri and had only stayed with the couple for two days, meanwhile another family member revealed that she was pregnant.
The prosecution objected to the accused being granted anticipatory bail. The judge did point out, however, that while the woman complained about dowry demands, she did not specify how much the demand was for.
Furthermore, the judge stated that the notion of forced sex lacks legal support.
"It is very unfortunate that the young girl suffered paralysis. However, the applicants (husband and family) cannot be held responsible for the same. Looking into the nature of allegations made against the applicants, custodial interrogation is not required. The applicants are ready to cooperate during the course of the investigation," said the judge.