The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a 57-year-old rape accused, Khem Kumar. The court cited a significant delay of over 2.5 years in the FIR filing and noted inconsistencies in the complainant's statements to different police stations.
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a 57-year-old man accused of rape, noting a delay of over two and a half years in the lodging of the FIR and inconsistencies in the complainant's accounts before different police stations.
Justice Prateek Jalan on Tuesday granted bail to the accused, Khem Kumar, subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs 40,000 and one surety of the like amount, with additional conditions imposed by the bench.
The Allegations
The prosecutrix, a woman in her 50s and a Delhi University graduate who has also studied abroad, alleged that the accused -- her classmate during college in the 1990s -- raped her in May 2023 on the pretext of marriage. The FIR was lodged at Ranhola police station in December 2025.
She had alleged that the accused raped her at an accommodation he had arranged for her after she separated from her parents in 2023.
Court Cites Inconsistencies and Delay
While granting bail, the court noted, "The first instance of sexual relations having been established was more than two and a half years prior to the subject FIR being registered. The petitioner and the prosecutrix are both mature and educated persons."
The High Court also noted that the prosecutrix had not mentioned the incident of rape in a separate complaint she had filed against the accused. "The contents of the complaint made by her to the SHO, Dwarka, Sector-9, on 14.05.2023, prima facie appear to be inconsistent with the allegations now made," Justice Jalan said in his order dated March 24.
The court further observed that in the subject FIR, the prosecutrix had not disclosed that she had filed a complaint before a different police station the previous day, and that the FIR registered pursuant to that complaint contained no allegation of sexual assault or rape.
"On the basis of the aforesaid factors, and having regard to the fact that the charge sheet has already been filed, I am of the view that it is not appropriate to deprive the petitioner of his liberty pending trial," Justice Jalan said.
Defense Arguments
Advocate Vikram Panwar, appearing for the accused, submitted that his client is a married man and that the FIR lodged on December 26, 2025, was based on allegations of sexual relations on the false pretext of marriage, with the first incident of physical relations alleged to have occurred on May 11, 2023.
He further argued that the allegations in the FIR were inconsistent with the complainant's contemporaneous representation to the SHO, Dwarka, on May 14, 2023, as well as a complaint made to PS North Avenue just one day before the subject FIR was registered -- in which, he pointed out, the prosecutrix had stated that she had not made any prior complaint against the accused.
State's Counter-Argument
On the point of delay, the counsel for the state argued that the prosecutrix had been under the impression that the accused was an officer in the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) and a divorcee. The court noted that this aspect would have to be examined at trial. (ANI)
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)