TN Rape Victim Rejects Court Proposal for 'Mediation' as a Gimmick

NEW DELHI: The 22 year old rape victim who had been offered the alternative of mediating with her rapist has rejected the courts direction to this effect. She was raped by one V Mohan in 2008, who had laced her drink with drugs. She was an orphan and just 14 years then.

“How can I marry someone who himself told me that he will be marrying his cousin. At least three times he would have told me that” the victim told PTI on the phone.

On being asked further whether she will marry him when there’s a prospect of getting property in her or her child’s name she said, “No way. All these are his gimmicks. He will go to any extent to cheat anyone and the court, like he did to me."

“If I go for a settlement, one day my child will question me for taking up his offer of money. If I agree to his offer, may be we will get something. But what will be her future… being brought up as the daughter of a rapist. Even if her father is a rapist, she will realise one day that her mother struggled for her. She will learn it the hard way. That will make her a good woman,” she said to Indian Express.

She even narrated her story after how the whole village had boycotted her and her family after the incident came to light. She also worked as a porter for six months to earn her subsistence. The victim was a tenth class student when she was raped while Mohan was an undergraduate.

Madras High Court Justice P Devadass, last week, had ordered bail for the rapist V Mohan saying that mediation is the best option for the rehabilitation of the victim, while citing same practice prevalent in various religions. His decision had even been reckoned as a valid solution by the Women Association of Madras.

“In the facts and circumstances, the case before us is a fit case for attempting compromise between the parties. ‘Mediation’ mode is best suited to them…Keeping the appellant inside the jail and asking him to participate in the mediation talk will not result in any fruitful result,” said Justice D Devadass in his judgement.

The judgement has been decried since all over social media, including by some of the eminent lawyers and law experts.