Consent under threat invalid: Ex-BJP MLA Narendra Pawar's pre-arrest bail rejected in gangrape case

A Bhiwandi court rejected former BJP MLA Narendra Pawar's anticipatory bail plea in an alleged gangrape case, saying the allegations were grave, a prima facie case was made out and custodial interrogation was necessary. The court rejected the defence's claims of consensual sex and explained the three-day delay in filing the FIR.

In Short

• Accused allegedly raped complainant at farmhouse after luring her under pretext of dispute resolution
• Defence claims consensual sex and false implication due to political rivalry
• Prosecution argues custodial interrogation needed for evidence recovery and medical tests

A court in Bhiwandi in Thane district on Monday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of former BJP MLA Narendra Pawar in a gangrape case registered against him and another accused. Additional Sessions Judge NK Karande said the allegations were grave, a prima facie case was made out, and custodial interrogation of the accused was necessary for an effective investigation.

Pawar, the former MLA from Kalyan West, is accused of calling the complainant to his office on September 13 on the pretext of resolving a dispute between her and her husband. According to the case, he then took her to a farmhouse in Bapgaon in Bhiwandi, where he and co-accused Shailesh Patil allegedly raped her after making her consume alcohol. The FIR states that she was threatened with a pistol and was later dropped near her house.

Appearing for Pawar, his counsel told the court that his client was innocent and had been falsely implicated because of local political disputes and pressure for a monetary settlement. The defence also claimed that the sexual relationship was consensual.

Pawar's counsel argued that the three-day delay in lodging the FIR created reasonable doubt, and further claimed that the complainant had visited Pawar's house for Ganpati celebrations on September 24, days after the alleged incident.

Opposing the plea, Additional Public Prosecutor Mundhe said Pawar was an influential political figure with prior criminal antecedents. He told the court that custodial interrogation was essential for medical examinations and for the recovery of the pistol, the vehicle, the accused persons' mobile phones and CCTV footage from the farmhouse, which had allegedly been removed.

The prosecutor also said the FIR was lodged after three days because the complainant was physically and mentally traumatised and was frightened because an influential former MLA and an armed police official were involved. The court accepted this explanation and said the delay was reasonable in the circumstances.

On the defence argument of consensual sex, the court held that any purported consent obtained under the threat of a firearm or coercion could not be treated as valid.

Judge Karande also noted that the complainant's act of secretly setting up a video recording before the assault showed that the alleged act took place against her will and without her free consent. Holding that the case involved serious allegations of gangrape and common intention, the court denied Pawar pre-arrest relief.

In its order, the court said the allegations were grave, that a prima facie case had been made out and that custodial interrogation was necessary for an effective investigation. Pawar and Patil have been booked under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act for rape, gangrape, criminal intimidation, common intention and other offences.

- Ends
Inputs from PTI