The Allahabad High Court has sparked controversy after granting bail to a man accused of raping a college student, noting in its order that the victim "invited trouble" and was "responsible" for what allegedly transpired.

The case pertains to an incident involving a postgraduate student who accused the man of raping her twice at a relative’s apartment in Gurugram.

According to her complaint, she had met the accused at a bar in Delhi, where she had gone with friends and consumed alcohol. Intoxicated and in need of support, she claimed she agreed to go with the accused to rest, expecting to be taken to his house in Noida. However, she alleged, he instead took her to a relative’s flat in Gurugram, where the assault took place.

Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh, while allowing the accused's bail application, remarked that "even if the allegation of the victim is accepted as true, then it can also be concluded that she herself invited trouble and was also responsible for the same," Live Law reported.

The court also noted that the victim, being an MA student, was competent enough to understand "the morality and significance of her act."

The medical report confirmed a torn hymen but did not offer a conclusive opinion on sexual assault. The accused, who has been in jail since December 2024 and has no prior criminal history, sought bail claiming the act was consensual.

His counsel argued that, based on the facts presented, the situation did not constitute rape but suggested a consensual relationship.

It was further submitted that the accused would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the legal proceedings.

The Additional Government Advocate opposed the bail plea, citing the FIR, but did not contest the factual aspects as argued by the defense.

Granting bail, the court said, “Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the o1ence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a &t case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed,” reported Live Law.

The judgment has triggered widespread criticism on social media and among legal experts, who have expressed concern over the court’s remarks on the victim’s responsibility, calling them regressive and victim-blaming.