The High Court observed that it is quite unnatural in Indian culture that a father-in-law would rape his own daughter-in-law along with some other person.

The Court cited the same as one of the considerations to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant after his daughter-in-law had filed a rape case against him and another man. The order stated,

"...considering the nature of accusations and the antecedents of the applicant, considering the gravity of the offence, considering that it is quite unnatural that a father-in-law shall commit rape of his own daughter-in-law along with some other person in our Indian culture, considering that the accusation has been made falsely with the object of injuring or humiliating his reputation in the society...

...In the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned..."

The applicant father-in-law was booked under Sections 376 (rape), 511 (punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The complainant had alleged that in 2018, the applicant along with another man came to the house of her brother when she was alone. After finding that the brother was not at home, the father-in-law started abusing her, and thereafter, two men allegedly tried to rape her.

Seeking anticipatory bail before the High Court, counsel for the applicant sought parity with the co-accused, who had already been granted anticipatory bail in the case.

Counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail, but did not dispute the claim of parity.

After hearing the parties, the Court granted the applicant anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount of ₹25,000, subject to certain conditions.