Friendship not a licence to rape or beat: Delhi High Court

Noting that friendship is not a “licence to rape or beat someone mercilessly”, the Delhi High Court has rejected the anticipatory bail of a man accused of sexually assaulting a 17-year-old girl in June.

Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma rejected the argument of the accused that it was a case of “consensual relationship”, noting, “even if the parties concerned were friends, friendship does not give any licence to the applicant to rape the victim repeatedly, confine her in his friend’s house and beat her mercilessly”.

As per the case details, the accused had befriended the minor girl through a social media platform. He called her to meet him on June 26, 2025, and subsequently took her to his friend’s flat in Govindpuri in New Delhi where he physically assaulted her, confined her, and repeatedly sexually assaulted her before finally letting her go around 10 p.m.

The girl went to her friend’s house in Tughlakabad after the ordeal but did not disclose the incident to anyone out of fear. Meanwhile, her parents lodged a missing report with the police.

The next morning, she was picked up by the police from he Govindpuri Metro Station. She was taken to the police station, where her family was also present. Out of fear, she did not reveal the details of sexual assault and refused medical examination.

She informed her mother about the incident only after 11 days, leading to the registration of the FIR. She said the accused had threatened to kill her if she disclosed the incident to anyone.

In trauma

The court, in its order on October 17, 2025, took the view that, “being a minor, she was under trauma and a sense of shame that had precluded her from disclosing anything to her parents and the police”. It also noted that the medical examination of the victim had revealed physical and sexual assault.

The court also remarked that the accused had still not joined the investigation, though his anticipatory bail applications had been withdrawn or rejected on four occasions in the past.

“In view of the foregoing circumstances, coupled with the serious nature of allegations levelled in the present case, prima facie corroborated by the material on record, this court finds that no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out,” the court said.