Complainant was aware accused was married, freely exercised choice: Madras High Court grants bail to former TN Minister M Manikandan in rape case

The Madras High Court on Wednesday granted conditional bail to former State Minister M Manikandan in a case involving allegations of rape on the false pretext of marriage (Dr M Manikandan v. State)..Justice M Nirmal Kumar after a preliminary examination of the allegations levelled opined that it was unlikely that the complainant had been induced into the relationship on the false pretext of marriage. ."The defacto complainant was aware of the fact that the petitioner was a married man ... the defacto complainant had sufficient intelligence to understand the significance of marriage, quality of the act she was consenting and she continued her relationship in secret till lodging of the complaint. The defacto complainant had shown no resistance to the petitioner's overtures. Thus, freely exercised a choice between resistance and assent. Thus, there is a clear distinction between rape and consensual sex," the order stated..The Court also observed that it did not appear as if the complainant had been forced to abort three pregnancies by Manikandan, as previously alleged. ."From the complaint and the materials so far collected, it is seen that though the defacto complainant claims that she was forced to go for abortion, in none of the occasion the petitioner had taken her forcibly or accompanied her during abortion," the Court said. .Justice Kumar opined that the complainant, being a graduate aged about 37 years, was "conscious and aware of her relationship with the petitioner and knowing that the petitioner was a married man and having wife and children.".It was noted that the relationship continued even after Manikandan was dropped from the AIADMK-led cabinet. Therefore, it was not as if the marriage was obstructed due to his position as a Minister, the Court observed. ."The defacto complainant had enjoyed the wealth lifestyle of the petitioner and she had voluntary continued her relationship from year 2017 onwards. The defacto complainant is aware that from 08.08.2017, the petitioner lost his Ministership and thereafter to, she continued her relationship and there was no obstacle for the defacto complainant to compel the petitioner to get married after the petitioner was dropped from the Ministry," the order stated. .Coupled with this, the Court observed Manikandan is an ex-Minister having deep social roots in India, that he has a family and that he is practicing as a doctor after losing his Ministership. Submissions on this aspect were made by Manikandan's counsel to emphasize that Manikandan is unlikely to abscond from the law, in the event of his release on bail. .Whereas concern was raised that Manikandan may tamper with evidence or witnesses due to political clout, the Court pointed out that in this case, the petitioner had been arrested, immediately remanded, his confession recorded and two mobile phones seized. Electronic gadgets seized from him and the complainant have also been sent for forensic examination, the Judge observed. .Additionally, the Court noted that anticipatory bail has already been granted to a co-accused, Bharani, who is alleged to have introduced the complainant to Manikandan and who is stated to have threatened the complainant when the relationship turned sour..In this backdrop, the Court granted bail subject to various conditions, including that Manikandan surrender his passport, that he reports before the Police daily for two weeks, and thereafter as required for interrogation and that he shall not tamper with any evidence or influence the witnesses during the investigation or trial..In May this year, a complaint was lodged by a Malaysian national alleging that Manikandan had been in a physical relationship with her for years on the false promise that he would leave his wife and marry her..The complainant alleged that she was impregnated thrice and forced by Manikandan to terminate the pregnancies. She claimed further that the former Minister continued the physical relationship in a brutal manner even after the termination of the pregnancies. Later, in April this year, the Minister is alleged to have threatened the complainant to go back to Malaysia without creating any further problems for him..He is also accused of having threatened to upload nude photographs of the complainant online. The Court was told that one such photograph was sent to the complainant's Telegram account. The complainant has alleged that the former Minister has been sending abusive messages and threats since April 15..The FIR filed on the basis of this complaint cited Sections 417 (punishment for cheating), 376 (rape), 313 (punishment for causing miscarriage without consent of the woman), 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) and 506(i) (punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), read with Section 67A (punishment for publishing or transmitting of material containing sexually explicit act, etc., in electronic form) of the Information Technology Act..Manikandan denied the allegations. During the course of an anticipatory bail hearing, he had alleged that the complaint was filed after repeated attempts for a compromise and extortionist demands were not accepted by him. He has maintained that the relationship with the complainant was consensual. .On June 16, his anticipatory bail plea was dismissed. Following this, he was arrested from Bangalore on June 20 and remanded. While granting bail on Wednesday, the Court also made it clear that if Manikandan absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A, IPC (failure by person released on bail or bond to appear in Court)..Madras High Court dismisses anticipatory bail plea by former TN Minister M Manikandan in rape case.Senior advocate KS Dinakaran and advocate Balaji Sankara Moorthy appeared for Manikandan in the bail case. Government advocate E Raj Thilak represented the State. Advocate R Jayaprakash appeared for the complainant (intervenor)..[Read Order]