The Bombay High Court recently rejected the interim bail plea of a 73-year-old man convicted of raping and impregnating his intellectually disabled domestic helper. The man, sentenced to 20 years of imprisonment by a sessions court in September 2022, sought bail citing his advanced age and health issues. However, the Court found substantial evidence against him, including attempts to cover up the crime.
Justice MM Sathaye, presiding over the case, emphasized that the victim’s mental condition rendered her consent irrelevant, as her IQ was determined to be only 42 percent. “There is material to indicate prima facie that attempts were made to hush up the incident and get rid of the pregnancy. Though the victim was 23 years old at the time of the incident (based on birth certificate Ex. 100), she has been found to be mentally retarded, and her IQ has been found to be 42% as per psychiatrist report Ex. 69. Therefore, the consent aspect is not material,” the Court observed.
Case Background
The incident dates back to January 2017, when the victim, a 23-year-old domestic helper working alongside her mother in the convict’s home, was assaulted while his wife was away. The assaults resulted in her pregnancy. The man and his family reportedly tried to silence the victim and her mother, coercing them to terminate the pregnancy. When these efforts failed, the victim’s mother lodged a formal complaint, leading to the man’s arrest and subsequent conviction under multiple provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Defense Arguments and Prosecution’s Stand
During the interim bail hearing, the convict’s counsel argued that inconsistencies in DNA sample collection raised doubts about the evidence. The defense also highlighted the convict’s age, health conditions—diabetes and high blood pressure—and the fact that he had already spent more than seven years in custody.
The prosecution countered by presenting conclusive DNA evidence linking the convict as the biological father of the victim’s child. The prosecution also underscored documented efforts by the convict and his family to intimidate the victim and her mother to suppress the complaint.
High Court’s Decision
After considering the arguments, the Court refused to grant interim bail, noting the severity of the crime and the evidence of attempts to cover it up. The decision reinforces the principle that age and health conditions cannot overshadow the gravity of heinous crimes or undermine the rights of vulnerable victims.
The case continues as part of the convict’s appeal against his 20-year sentence.
Case: Bhalchandra Mhatre vs State of Maharashtra – Available on LAWFYI.IO
