New Delhi: The Supreme Court has stayed an Allahabad high court order on examining an alleged rape victim’s horoscope.
On June 3, a vacation bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Pankaj Mithal assembled at 3 pm to stay the direction issued by a single judge of the Allahabad high court to examine whether the woman who accused a person of rape is ‘manglik’.
The single judge order was issued by Justice Brij Raj Singh, while hearing a bail application filed by the accused, who said that he couldn’t marry the woman because she is ‘manglik’.
The woman has, however, denied that she is ‘manglik’.
The high court, therefore, directed the head of the astrology department of the Lucknow University, to examine her horoscope to decide whether she is ‘manglik’ or not, and submit a report to the court in a sealed cover.
The high court issued the direction on May 23.
According to Hindu belief, a person born under the influence of Mars (Mangal) suffers from Mangal dosha (defect), and such a person is likely to cause the early death of the spouse, if the latter does not suffer from a similar dosha.
In arranged Hindu marriages, many families stress on matching the horoscope. This involves checking whether one of the potential matches suffers from this dosha.
The high court’s direction invited the top court’s ire not because the Hindu belief is unscientific and superstitious, but on the question whether a rape-accused is entitled to use this as a ground to deny the allegation of rape by a survivor, who alleged that the accused had sex with her on the promise of marriage, but later broke it because she was a ‘manglik’, whereas he is not.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union of India, described the high court’s direction as “disturbing”, and requested the apex court vacation bench to stay the order.
The counsel for the woman, Ajay Kumar Singh, however, told the bench that the high court had issued the direction under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, which enables a court to seek the opinion of experts, with the consent of the parties.
The bench, however, said that the direction is totally out of context and involves the right to privacy and so many other aspects.
When Singh maintained that astrology is considered as a science, and the university awards degrees to students studying the course, the bench said it is not challenging the subject matter, or joining the issue of whether astrology is a science.
“We respect it,” the bench said, adding that the question here is whether the judicial forum can issue this direction. “We say nothing on the merits of the case or order in the interest of justice,” the bench observed in its order.
It directed the high court to decide the accused’s bail application on the basis of its merits.
The case will be next heard on June 26.