The case concerns allegations that the accused-widow and her son were complicit in the carrying out the rape of a woman earlier this year.
The complainant is said to have been in a long-distance relationship with the elder son of the widow after they met via Facebook.
The widow alleged that the complainant eventually started to live in the house of the widow after her elder son “married” the complainant without any rituals or ceremonies, through a video call. The elder son, who lived in the USA, had never physically met the complainant, the widow added.
While so, in January this year, the widow’s younger son came home from abroad.
At this juncture, the widow said that her family members began pressurising her to end the informal “marriage” arrangement between the complainant and her elder son.
Consequently, the widow said that a compromise agreement was executed with the complainant in the presence of Panchayat members to terminate the said relationship. The widow also said that an amount of ₹11 lakh was handed over to the complainant as part of the compromise, which was executed in February this year.
As per the widow, weeks after the compromise, the complainant went on file a criminal case against the widow and her younger son, accusing them of having committed rape (Section 376 (2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code/ IPC), wrongful confinement (Section 342), hurt (Section 323) and criminal intimidation (Section 506).
After a trial court in Punjab and the Punjab and Haryana High Court declined to allow the widow’s plea for pre-arrest bail, she approached the Supreme Court for relief.
Source: Barandbench
