The Hush Post: A woman from Delhi has accused another woman of raping and sodomising her using a sex toy.
Notably, the apex court had recently decriminalised homosexuality in a landmark judgment. But, the victim failed in her attempt to lodge an FIR against the accused. The accused woman allegedly sodomised her “using a sex toy” and subjected her to “continuous cruelty”, the report said.
The victim hails from one of the east Indian states. She alleged that the accused raped her and subjected her to repeated sexual and physical assaults. The accused is a 19-year-old woman. The victim’s ordeal continued as the cops at Seemapuri Police Station in Delhi refused to book the accused.
“I had requested the police at the Seemapuri Police Station to charge her. But they refused to lodge a complaint. They even asked me to not mention it to the magistrate, but I did,” News18 quoted the victim as saying.
A magistrate at Karkardooma district court has recorded the statement of the accused under Section 164 of the CrPC.
In March this year, the victim quit her job in Gurgaon to start her own business. She got into an agreement wherein she was required to get other partners to invest in an online clothing business. After her training session in Punjab’s Rajpura, the victim invested Rs 1.5 lakh as investment money. The victim’s father had arranged this money through a loan shark, the report said.
Then victim started approaching prospective partners at railway stations, airports, or bus stops to brief them about her business proposal. During this, the victim met one Rohit, another accused in the case. Rohit reportedly told the victim that he is working for HCL and is ready to invest in her business.
Then, Rohit took the victim to an apartment in Dilshad Colony in Delhi. There Rohit and another accused Rahul raped the victim and made her objectionable videos to blackmail her.
Victim accuses another woman of raping and sodomising her with a sex toy, but could not get her booked in first such case after SC verdict on same-sex carnal intercourse
“First, they forced me to have sex with them. Then it became a gang affair. Soon, I was sent to serve clients and the accused woman was always there in the apartment. She often tried to get close to me, and when I refused, she used to beat me,” the victim said.
During this period, the accused allowed the victim to contact her family back home only on a few occasions. “Rahul made me talk to my parents at times and I was threatened against revealing anything. They received Rs 20,000 in their account directly from Rahul as my ‘fees’. They were under the assumption that I was still working for the business venture,” the victim said.
The victim said she now fears that her family may never know the reality. “They will commit suicide if they come to know what has befallen me.”
The police have managed to arrest Rahul and area searching for Rohit who is absconding. A Delhi court has sent Rahul to judicial custody in Tihar Jail.
Speaking about her ordeal, the victim said Rohit and Rahul pinned her down on all fours on the bed. And the accused woman “raped” her using a sex toy to “make her ready for unnatural sex for her customers”.
“The woman was deriving pleasure out of it. I want to see her punished along with the other two,” she said.
A social activist Hemant Sharma helped rescue the victim. Sharma, a member of Paramjyoti Sewa Foundation, said punishing the accused woman under Section 376 of the IPC is “impossible”.
“Section 376 lists down punishment for rape but confines it to only a man-woman affair and where same-sex assault goes unnoticed,” Sharma said.
At present, the police have booked Rahul, Rohit, and Sagar, who allegedly aided the victim’s confinement. The police have booked Rahul and Rohit for rape, illegal confinement and sections of the Immoral Trafficking Prevention Act. But, the police have not charged Sagar with rape or attempt to rape, the report said.
The victim has also informed the court that she is six weeks pregnant and wishes to abort the foetus. She has sought that the DNA of the foetus after the abortion should be matched with that of the accused men. She wants this to prove the viability of offence and highlight her being forced into sex with several persons.
Seemapuri SHO said: “The victim had given us a written statement and on the basis of that we lodged an FIR. For us, arresting someone is the easiest thing to do, but we need evidence for that. We are still in the examination process and are at an initial stage of the investigation.”
He said that the Supreme Court has read down Section 377. So, there is no legal provision under which police can book a woman on the charges of raping another woman.
But, the victim’s lawyer, Priyanka Dagar, said that Section 377 applies in the case due to “the absence of consent”.
“The Supreme Court did read down Section 377 but that applies to cases where carnal intercourse is through mutual consent. In my client’s case, she was undoubtedly forced. Hence, only Section 377 will apply,” Advocate Dagar said.
The lawyer also said that the FIR did not mean much as the statement made before the police is inadmissible as evidence. And that they were relying solely on her statement recorded under Section 164 of CrPC.