Delhi High Court criticises trial court for presuming women could not have committed crime

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday observed that presumptions based on gender have no place within the justice system unless such presumptions are specifically provided for by law. [The State Govt of NCT Of Delhi versus Babita & Ors].The Court explained that presumptions based on gender, otherwise, would undermine the pursuit of truth and justice.Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma made the observation while criticising a trial court order in which it was stated that “female members” could not have participated in the offences alleged in a case involving accusations of assault, kidnapping and an attempt to murder a person. "The trial court in the present case has given no reasons as to what led it to believe at this stage, to assume on its own, that the 'female members' could not have participated in the commission of offence despite there being specific allegations levelled and specific roles attributed to them by the victim himself as recorded in the FIR and statement of the independent witnesses," the High Court observed..The trial court had framed charges against five men in the case and discharged five women accused in the case on the ground that there was no evidence to prove they had instigated the male accused. The State challenged the order before the High Court..Justice Sharma said an assumption to favour of a female accused without any substantive basis or valid grounds goes against the core principles of the justice system.The judge added that the legal system is predicated on the objective assessment of facts rather than preconceived notions. “Our legal system is founded on the principle of gender neutrality, unless otherwise provided, where each individual, regardless of their gender, is held accountable for their actions in accordance with the law. Presumptions based on gender have no place within this framework, unless provided by law, as they undermine the pursuit of truth and justice,” the Court said..The Court noted that the presumption in favour of the female accused was made by the trial court at the stage of framing of charge, when its primary duty was only to see whether a prima facie case was made out or not. It also noted that the charge sheet was filed against ten persons including five women, while the trial court order discharging the women named only four of them. However, the trial court asked “all lady accused persons” to furnish bail bonds under Section 437A of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the High Court noted. “This Court is again constrained to observe that writing so in a judicial order does not reflect well on the judicial philosophy of treating all genders equally. It was a judicial order and the names of the persons discharged who were directed to furnish bail bonds should have been mentioned instead of mentioning and pointing them by their gender,” Justice Sharma observed..The High Court proceeded to set aside the trial court order and remand the case back to the trial court.Justice Sharma also directed circulation of the judgement among all the Judicial Officers and Director (Academics), Delhi Judicial Academy for taking note of its contents.Additional Public Prosecutor Manoj Pant represented the State.The respondents (accused) appeared in person..[Read Judgment]