Allahabad High Court recently granted bail on the condition of marriage to the perpetrator of sexual violence.

• Recent Court Rulings on Bail Conditions for Rape Accused: The Allahabad High Court, in its judgment on Atul Gautam vs State of Uttar Pradesh (2025), granted bail to a man accused of raping his inter-faith live-in partner under the condition that he marry the survivor under the Special Marriage Act and deposit ₹5 lakh.
  • 2024 Ruling: This ruling followed a similar approach in the case of Abhishek vs State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2024), where the High Court granted bail to a rape accused on the condition that he marry the survivor and care for her and their newborn child.
  • Precedent: These decisions were influenced by a precedent set in Ramashankar vs State of Uttar Pradesh (2022), where bail was similarly granted with marriage conditions.

Enroll now for UPSC Online Course

Key Constitutional and Legal Concerns

• Violation of Fundamental Rights of the Rape Survior:
  • Article 21: The right to dignity, autonomy, and protection from coercion.
  • Article 14: The right to equal protection before the law.
  • Article 15: Protection from gender-based discrimination.
• Contradiction with Supreme Court Guidelines: In the case of Aparna Bhat vs State of Madhya Pradesh (2021), the Supreme Court of India issued guidelines for bail conditions in criminal cases, emphasizing that
  • Secondary Trauma of the Victim: Courts must ensure that the conditions of bail prevent any contact between the accused and the survivor to avoid secondary trauma. The practice of requiring the accused to marry the survivor, as seen in the cases mentioned above, violates this principle.
  • Reinforcing Patriarchal Attitudes: Moreover, the Supreme Court directed that bail conditions should not reinforce gender stereotypes or patriarchal attitudes towards women. These guidelines ensure that the legal process does not perpetuate outdated views on gender and women’s autonomy.

Concerns Regarding Survivor Welfare

• Bodily Autonomy: Such approach can reinforce harmful beliefs that marriage can serve as a remedy for rape, which wrongly attempts to restore the survivor’s perceived “purity” or honor. Such reasoning undermines the survivor’s autonomy and can lead to coercive, unequal marital relationships.
• Creates Coercive Marital Relationships: This also creates a perverse incentive for the accused to manipulate the survivor into agreeing to marriage, thus furthering the possibility of abuse under the guise of reconciliation. 
• Legalising Abuse and Control: This dynamic, where the survivor is forced into a dependent relationship with the accused, risks legalizing further abuse while complicating the survivor’s quest for justice.
• Affecting Testimony of the Survivor: Imposing marriage as a bail condition alters the survivor’s relationship with the accused and can influence the survivor’s testimony. 
  • The possibility of coercion or manipulation into a marital relationship could directly impact the survivor’s ability to testify freely and truthfully in court.

Check Out UPSC CSE Books From PW Store

State’s Role in Ensuring Survivor Welfare

The state plays a crucial role in ensuring the welfare of rape survivors and their children. 

• Welfare Measures: In Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents (2024), the Court emphasized that the state must provide essential services such as shelter, food, education, and counseling for survivors.
  • Dependency on Perpetrator: The lack of a comprehensive support system often leaves survivors with little choice but to rely on their perpetrators for basic needs. 
  • Impact: This situation not only perpetuates cycles of exploitation but also violates the survivors’ right to live with dignity under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
• Shifting the Burden: By failing to provide adequate support, the state shifts its responsibility to the judiciary, resulting in court-imposed conditions that may conflict with constitutional principles.
  • Such decisions inadvertently force the survivor into a dependent relationship with the accused, further entrenching the state’s neglect.

Ethical and Legal Implications

• Perverse Incentive for Accused: The accused may manipulate survivors into marriage to secure bail and leniency in sentencing. This undermines the punitive and deterrent function of the law.
• Judicial Overreach in Bail Conditions: Courts should avoid imposing socially conditioned solutions that infringe on the rights of survivors. Bail should be based on legal merit, not on personal settlement mechanisms.

Way Forward

• Strict Adherence to Supreme Court Directives: Ensure bail conditions uphold the autonomy of survivors and align with legal standards.
• Stronger Legal Provisions for Survivor Protection: Fast-track trials to minimize prolonged dependency on the accused.
  • Implementing comprehensive rehabilitation policies, including financial support, mental health services, and social reintegration.
• Judicial Training and Awareness: Judges must be sensitized to gender justice and constitutional morality.
  • Ensure that justice is survivor-centric, rather than convenience-based.

Enroll now for UPSC Online Classes

Conclusion

The practice of imposing marriage as a bail condition requires urgent re-evaluation. Justice must not be shaped by societal norms that undermine the dignity, autonomy, and well-being of the survivor. Legal remedies must prioritize the survivor’s rights and not perpetuate trauma through coercive or unequal relationships.

Ready to boost your UPSC 2025 preparation? Join PW’s UPSC online courses today!