Intercourse not required for it to be rape: Complainant’s advocate in Rohit Tilak case | pune news | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Nov 18, 2017-Saturday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Intercourse not required for it to be rape: Complainant’s advocate in Rohit Tilak case

pune Updated: Aug 02, 2017 10:55 IST
Shalaka Shinde
The complainant in the alleged rape case against Rohit Tilak.

The complainant in the alleged rape case against Rohit Tilak.(HT PHOTO)

Congressman Rohit Tilak’s anticipatory bail in a rape case filed by a 41-year-old woman was adjourned till August 8 by Justice LL Yenkar on Tuesday.

Advocate Nandu Phadke, representing the direct descendant of freedom fighter Bal Gangadhar Tilak, raised questions about the credibility of the charges filed by the woman during the hearing, which lasted three-and-a-half hours. Advocate Phadke claimed that the woman’s husband, who lives in a foreign country with two of her children, was in the country for a vacation eight days before she filed the rape complaint. He, then, asked the court if she claimed to have been raped while her husband was in the country.

Intercourse is not required for it to be rape,” said Advocate BA Aloor, while representing the complainant woman along with Advocate Tosif Shiekh, while claiming that it is not a one-day incident when the woman is claiming to have been raped. His client’s complaint, he said, is against the way she was treated by Tilak.

Advocate Aloor, on the other hand, asked the court to look at the case as misuse of a woman whose husband is away. 

The charges levelled by the woman claiming she was threatened with an acid attack by the men who work for Tilak, were “concocted, fabricated, and imaginary”, said advocate Phadke. Advocate Aloor, countered the statement by asking, “Why would a woman put herself through this ordeal based on an imaginary case?” 

The woman has a history of filing fake cases advocate Phadke said, invoking two earlier cases filed by her - one against four male lawyers travelling in a Mumbai-Pune train and another one which is pending in the High Court. To this, advocate Aloor claimed that the cases were not fake and are pending in the High Court.

Advocate Phadke, then, went on to add that the woman is a lawyer practising in various High Courts for the past 18 years and that she knows criminal law well enough to orchestrate the entire case. To which, advocate Aloor said that there are several other women “who have been subject to atrocities by this man”. He cited a screen-shot of an exchange of text messages allegedly between the complainant and Tilak’s wife Pranati, where she agrees to have knowledge of Tilak’s affairs with other women.

While the complainant’s camp has been claiming to have been threatened by Pranati and Tilak, advocate Phadke submitted in the court that the complainant is the one who threatened to bring Pranati down first.

The complainant’s representative tried to play an audio recording of an alleged call between the two parties. The court, however did not allow it as it was not submitted beforehand. Justice LL Yenkar said, “Prosecution has every right to take necessary steps in the matter,” before posting it for hearing on August 8.