By Deepika Sarma
In the last two days, we’ve seen two interesting judgments related to sexual violence that have us really intrigued.
Two of them have to do with the same case: the denying of anticipatory bail to a male journalist based in Goa who harassed or assaulted three women journalists. All of the women filed cases against him separately, through September and October, after which he filed for anticipatory bail. On October 14, an additional sessions judge in Mapusa denied bail. Excerpts from the judgment published by The Hoot show that the judge was incredibly supportive of the victims, dismissing the idea that the women were tying to falsely implicate the “senior journalist” who was the accused. It also smashed the defense’s claim that the cases were of consensual relationships having turned sour:
“[T]he victim/victims never had any friendship with the accused who was their superior nor there is anything to suggest even remotely that the victim/victims were the consenting party/parties.”
The judgment also said releasing the accused on bail would demoralise the victims as well as others who might wish to come forward with similar charges against the journalist.
After this cracker of a judgment that derailed the accused’s attempts to gaslight the victims and question their motives while also recognizing that the senior journalist in question possibly had other victims as well who hadn’t come forward, the accused filed for anticipatory bail again, this time in the High Court of Bombay at Goa. On October 30, it was rejected again in no uncertain terms.
The judge who passed the order threw aside the defense’s claims that the victims’ complaints were false or suspect because they had delayed filing their complaints and recognised, or that the complaints were motivated by professional rivalry, and said that the accused appeared to be “habitual” when it came to committing crimes against women.
Both judgments are great examples of how a sensitive judiciary can make a positive difference to the process of addressing sexual violence, so that the complainants aren’t made victims a second time over.