In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has reversed the anticipatory bail granted to Jignesh Mehta, a well-known stock trader and businessman based in Mumbai, who stands accused of raping a model and actress. The apex court’s decision came after the survivor lodged an appeal challenging the earlier order by the Bombay High Court, which had allowed Mehta to obtain pre-arrest bail.
The alleged rape took place when Mehta, purportedly luring the victim with the promise of a lucrative modeling assignment, invited her to a hotel room in Andheri. It was shortly after the survivor made a distress call to the Mumbai Police Control Room (PCR) that Mehta was apprehended.
Initially, the Dindoshi Sessions Court denied Mehta’s plea for bail. Subsequently, Mehta filed an anticipatory bail application in the Bombay High Court, where, to many’s surprise, he was granted bail against a surety bond of Rs 25,000. The high court also mandated that Mehta report to the police station thrice a week for three hours each time.
Dismayed by the lack of a fair hearing in the Bombay HC, despite filing an intervention application, the survivor took her case to the Supreme Court. The counsel representing the complainant highlighted the disregard facing the survivor and the negligence displayed by the investigating officers during the trial.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court stressed the importance of giving the survivor a fair opportunity to be heard and to oppose Mehta’s anticipatory bail plea, which had been overlooked by the Bombay High Court. The court also acknowledged the survivor’s multiple complaints regarding the lackadaisical attitude of the investigating officers handling the case.
Consequently, the apex court deemed the grant of anticipatory bail to Jignesh Mehta untenable, swiftly overturning the decision and revoking his bail bonds. As a result, Mehta currently remains in custody, awaiting further legal proceedings.
This landmark ruling by the Supreme Court sends a clear message that no individual is above the law, regardless of their social standing or financial influence. It emphasizes the need for a fair and impartial judicial system while prioritizing the rights and well-being of sexual assault survivors. This decision also serves as a reminder to law enforcement agencies to thoroughly investigate cases of this nature and to demonstrate sensitivity and empathy towards victims. The ramifications of this ruling are expected to have a profound impact on future cases involving high-profile individuals, ensuring that justice is served equitably and impartially.
