Araria Rape: SC Grants Bail to Social Workers Held For ‘Contempt’

Justice Mishra orally observed it is a “totally impermissible order by which they were sent to custody.”

The Supreme Court bench led by Justice Mishra observed that it is a “totally impermissible order by which they (members of Jan Jagran Shakti Sangathan) were sent to custody.”

(Photo: Altered by The Quint)

The Supreme Court bench led by Justice Arun Mishra on Tuesday, 4 August, granted interim bail to Tanmay and Kalyani, members of Jan Jagran Shakti Sangathan, who were jailed for disrupting court proceedings while hearing the Araria gang rape case.

Justice Mishra orally observed that it is a "totally impermissible order by which they were sent to custody," reported Bar and Bench.

The two social workers were represented by Advocate Vrinda Grover.

YOU SHOULD READ ON BECAUSE

On 17 July, a local court granted bail to a 22-year-old rape survivor in Bihar’s Araria district, who was earlier sent to jail for contempt of court and ‘obstructing government servants from discharging their duty’ among other charges.

However, the court denied bail to the two social workers who were also arrested along with her.

WHY WERE THEY ARRESTED

The complainant, at the Araria women’s police station, had alleged that she was gang-raped on 6 July after which an FIR was registered.

The rape survivor was asked to record her statement before a magistrate, for which, as per the police, she appeared with two social workers – Tanmay and Kalyani – from NGO Jan Jagran Shakti Sangathan.

The FIR reads, “While recording their statement, the accused trio insulted the presiding officer by misbehaving with him and tried to obstruct the proceedings of the court. The survivor refused to sign the written statement saying that she would not sign until Kalyani and Tanmay have read it,” ThePrint’s report added.

The accused trio was reportedly charged under Sections 353, 228 of the IPC and under Sections 188,180, 120 (B) of the Contempt of Court Act.

Meanwhile, a statement issued by the said NGO mentioned that the court “mistook” the “nervousness” of the survivor for an insult.

(With inputs from Bar and Bench)