In a rape case, the WhatsApp chat of the victim and the accused changed the course of the entire case. On one hand, while the victim is accusing the accused of raping and blackmailing her, WhatsApp chat presented on behalf of the accused tells a different story.
The court prima facie held that the victim herself was obscenely chatting with the accused on WhatsApp. Even she is allegedly inciting the accused to have a physical relationship. In this way, the court has ordered the release of the accused in jail for the last five and a half months on bail.
The court of Rohini-based Additional Sessions Judge Jitendra Kumar Mishra remarked in the case that after looking at the record of WhatsApp chat on the mobile phone of the victim and the accused, prima facie it was clear that the two had a physical relationship for years and with the consent of the two.
The court said that the victim’s statements were not trustworthy. The court said that the facts presented are insufficient to prove an incident like rape. Referring to a part of the WhatsApp chat, the court said that the victim is asking the accused to talk while bathing. Not only this, but the victim is also encouraging the accused to do vulgar things. The court said that the entire case was not unilateral.
Accused of the married person of neighborhood
In this case, the victim accused a married man of the neighborhood of raping her by pretending to be married. The girl said that for three years he had been forcibly making sexual relations with her and blackmailing her and asking for cash.
The accused was arrested in this case by the police in February 2020. On the request of the lawyer of the accused, the police got out the record of the years-long WhatsApp chat between the two, which continued till before the incident. Even in this chat, the victim is asking the accused to marry the court.
In this case, the court questioned the victim by giving a personal bond of one lakh rupees and conditional bail on the basis of the same rupee value. The court said that the accused lived in the house next to the victim.
The victim knew that she was married. She also knew that she also had a 16-year-old daughter. If the victim knew this, then from where did the talk of marriage fall. The court said that there are so many lies in this case that at present, even allegations like blackmailing cannot be trusted.
Both have FIR on each other
In this case, the first FIR was registered on behalf of the father of the accused. In the first FIR, the victim’s father and brother are accused, while in the second FIR, the victim has registered rape and blackmailing. The court has said that prima facie it appears that both the FIRs have been registered as a mutual vendetta.