The Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of rape, observing that unverified allegations could not be used to morally condemn him at the pre-trial stage, particularly when the complainant herself acknowledged that the relationship between the parties was consensual in nature in the past.
A Bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Prasanna B. Varale was hearing an appeal filed by the Appellant challenging the Punjab & Haryana High Court’s refusal to grant him anticipatory bail.
As per the complaint lodged on November 11, 2025, the complainant alleged that the appellant had developed a relationship with her after misleading her about his marital status. She further alleged that he later threatened her to withdraw an earlier complaint and had sexual intercourse with her on the intervening night of November 9–10, 2025 after administering alcohol and intimidating her.
The appellant, on the other hand, contended that the relationship was entirely consensual and alleged that he had been falsely implicated as part of an extortion attempt. He also relied on digital material to dispute the complainant’s version.
Taking note that interim protection had earlier been granted and that the appellant had cooperated with the investigation by appearing before the Investigating Officer, the Court held that custodial protection was warranted. The Bench specifically observed that whether threats were actually extended, as alleged by the complainant, was a matter of evidence to be tested during trial.
“Based on unverified allegations, it cannot be held that the appellant requires to be morally condemned,” the Court observed while allowing the appeal.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned High Court order and directed that Gill be released on anticipatory bail on terms to be fixed by the jurisdictional Investigating Officer, subject to his appearance before the jurisdictional court on all hearing dates unless specifically exempted.
