Delhi HC grants bail to film director Sanoj Kumar Mishra in rape case, says ‘yet another case of false complaint'
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to film director Sanoj Kumar Mishra, who was accused of raping a woman, saying the case reflected the recent trend of lodging false complaints of sexual offences.
The High Court noted that the woman in her affidavit testified that she was living in a relationship with Mr. Mishra and had established physical relations with him with consent, and had lodged the complaint under the influence of some of his rivals.
Justice Girish Kathpalia was informed by the SHO of Nabi Karim that he has already initiated the process for registration of an FIR against the complainant woman and all those persons who allegedly conspired to make her lodge false complaint against the accused.
'This is yet another case, reflecting the recent trend of lodging false complaints of sexual offences. Every false complaint of sexual offences not just causes immense damage to the person accused of the offence, but also creates cynicism and distrust across the society, which leads to even the genuine victims of sexual offences suffer, as society starts suspecting her truthful complaint also to be false. Such false complaints have to be dealt with sternly,' the High Court said in its order passed on May 30.
Senior advocate Amit Chadha, appearing for Mr. Mishra, submitted that his client has been falsely implicated by the complainant to allegedly compel him to give her a break in the film industry.
The counsel contended that the accused and the prosecutrix were in live-in relationship for a long time, that too in Mumbai, and according to the prosecution, the alleged offence took place in Orcha, Madhya Pradesh, so Delhi had no jurisdiction.
The High Court also noted that in the affidavit, the complainant has also testified that she has no objection if the accused is released on bail.
Considering the circumstances, Justice Kathpalia said he found no reason to deprive liberty to the accused any further.
The High Court ranted him bail on furnishing of a personal bond of ₹10,000 and a surety of the like amount.
Earlier, the high court had denied anticipatory bail to Mishra after which he was arrested on March 30 in connection with offences alleged under Section 376 (rape), 354C (voyeurism), 313 (causing miscarriage without consent), 323 (causing hurt) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of IPC.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
38 minutes ago
- News18
Supreme Court Clears Teacher Of Abetment Charge, Says ‘Scolding Alone Not Suicide Trigger'
Last Updated: The case arose from an FIR registered by the CBCID under Sections 306 IPC and 174 CrPC, after a student allegedly took his life by hanging himself in a hostel room in 2014. In relief to a school correspondent in Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court has quashed charges framed against him under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (abetment of suicide) in connection with the suicide of a hostel student in 2014. The Bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra allowed the appeal filed by the accused against the order of the Madras High Court dated June 14, 2024, which had rejected his plea for discharge. The Court observed, 'No normal person could have imagined that a scolding, that too based on a complaint by a student, would result in such tragedy due to the student so scolded taking his own life…such scolding was the least, a correspondent was required to do, to ensure that the complaint made against the deceased by another student was taken note of and remedial measures effected." The case arose from an FIR registered by the CBCID under Sections 306 IPC and 174 CrPC, after a student allegedly took his life by hanging himself in a hostel room. The charge sheet, however, only included the charge under Section 306 IPC. According to the Appellant, who served as the correspondent of the school and was in charge of its operations, he had merely reprimanded the student after receiving a complaint from another student. The appellant submitted that the reprimand was issued in his capacity as a guardian and authority figure, to ensure discipline and order in the hostel premises. It was contended that there was no personal enmity, and that the appellant could not have foreseen that a mere scolding would lead the student to take such an extreme step. The appellant argued that there was no criminal intent or mens rea, an essential ingredient for invoking Section 306 IPC. Notably, the State of Tamil Nadu, represented by AAG Amit Anand Tiwari, conceded that there appeared to be no justifiable ground to prosecute the appellant under Section 306 IPC. The complainant, who is also the father of the deceased, did not appear before the Court despite valid service of notice. Taking note of the facts and submissions, the Court held that no ordinary person in the appellant's position could have anticipated such a tragic outcome from a verbal reprimand based on a peer complaint. The Court emphasized that in the absence of criminal intent, no offence under Section 306 IPC was made out. 'In the considered opinion of this Court, under such admitted factual position, no mens rea can be attributed to the appellant, much less with regard to abetment of suicide committed by the deceased," the Bench held. Accordingly, the Court allowed the Appeal and set aside the order framing charges. The appellant has been discharged from the case, bringing an end to the criminal proceedings initiated against him. All pending applications in the matter were also disposed of.
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
Man convicted in Anna University sexual assault case sentenced to life imprisonment
A Chennai court on Monday sentenced the man convicted of sexually assaulting a student on the campus of Anna University to life imprisonment for a minimum period of 30 years without remission, Live Law reported. The man, Gnanasekaran, has also been directed to pay a fine of Rs 90,000. On May 28, he was found guilty on all 11 charges filed against him and convicted under sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita pertaining to rape and sexual harassment, in addition to sections of the Information Technology Act and Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act. Gnanasekaran is accused of having filmed the student and her partner on the university campus and threatening to leak the footage to the dean and the couple's parents if they did not comply with his demands. The incident occurred on December 23, when Gnanasekaran allegedly took the complainant to a remote location where he first blackmailed her before sexually assaulting her. The first information report filed in the case stated that he had illegally detained the student for 40 minutes. Gnanasekaran, who ran a roadside eatery near the campus, was arrested by the Greater Chennai Police two days after the assault. The police had said that at least seven other cases were pending against him. The case had sparked a controversy after the FIR based on the complaint was leaked online, revealing the identity of the student. Stating that this had caused the student 'trauma and humiliation', the Madras High Court directed the Tamil Nadu government on December 28 to provide Rs 25 lakh in compensation to her. The bench also called it a serious failure on the part of the police. In addition, the High Court had constituted an all-woman Special Investigation Team to probe the case. The High Court had also expressed shock over the language used in the FIR, stating that it amounted to victim-shaming, and directed the Tamil Nadu Police to conduct a departmental inquiry into the leak. However, the Supreme Court in January stayed the High Court order on the inquiry. Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Siddharth Luthra, representing the Tamil Nadu government, had attributed the leak to a technical glitch.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
'I'm Pregnant': Woman Apologises To Bengaluru Auto Driver After Viral 'Chappal' Assault Video
Last Updated: It occurred around 3 pm when Mishra, along with her husband, both riding a two-wheeler, allegedly brushed against Lokesh's auto while merging lanes. It's Bengaluru again! The IT hub of India always makes it to the headlines for the most strange, unique reasons. This time, for a road dispute between a woman and an auto driver, which took an ugly turn when the latter started hitting the motorist with a slipper in broad daylight. The dramatic episode, which was captured on camera outside Centro Mall in Bellandur, quickly went viral, gaining considerable attention and sparking debates. In the clip shared on X, a 28-year-old woman, identified as Pankhuri Mishra, is seen repeatedly beating the driver with her slipper while he makes a video of the confrontation. Despite being attacked, the driver maintains calm and continues to record. As it progresses, the woman is heard saying, 'Yeh badtameezi kar rha hai, mera pair kuchla aur uske baad video bana raha hai (This guy is misbehaving, he crushed my leg and then he is making a video.)" Lokesh, on the other hand, said he began recording the incident because the woman was arguing in Hindi instead of the local language, Kannada. Bengaluru Again — NCMIndia Council For Men Affairs (@NCMIndiaa) June 1, 2025 As per reports, the incident occurred around 3 pm when Mishra, along with her husband, both riding a two-wheeler, allegedly brushed against Lokesh's auto while merging lanes. According to the Indian Express, Lokesh filed a police complaint after the event, accusing Mishra of unprovoked assault. Based on his accusation, Bellandur police filed an FIR against Mishra, who is from Bihar and currently lives in Bengaluru. As things intensified, Mishra, along with her husband, issued a public apology. In a video shared on the internet, the couple is seen touching the driver's feet and claiming she panicked because she is pregnant and felt uncomfortable when the auto approached their two-wheeler. She further added, 'We love Bengaluru, we love the culture and we love the people." A comment read, 'Under no context is getting violent justifiable. Just stop validating wrongs. It has become a practice now to first commit and grave mistake and then wiggle out of it by issuing an apology." Reportedly, several pro-Kannada groups staged protests against Mishra and her husband, demanding strict action against them.
