A controversial statement by the lawyer representing Manojeet Mishra, one of the main accused in a disturbing campus rape case, has sparked widespread outrage across India. In an interview with the media, lawyer Raju Ganguly dismissed the forensic evidence and the survivor’s statement, claiming that the scratches found on Manojeet’s body were not the result of a struggle, but were instead “love bites.”
The comment has triggered intense backlash online, with many labeling it insensitive and accusing the defense of attempting to mislead the investigation and sway public opinion.
Lawyer’s Controversial Claim
Raju Ganguly, who says he is both the legal counsel and former senior of the accused, spoke to news agency ANI about his client’s version of events. Recounting a conversation with Manojeet, he said:
“I asked Manojeet about the serious allegations against him, and he told me he was being portrayed as a villain. When I brought up the nail marks mentioned in reports, he removed his shirt and showed me a mark on his neck, saying it was a love bite. Just as I asked who gave it to him, police escorted him away.”
He further demanded that the survivor’s mobile phone be seized for forensic analysis, and that her call records be presented in court. Based on his own review of some records, Ganguly claimed that the case “may not amount to rape” and said he would be able to draw a conclusion by July 20.
Case Background
The case involves the alleged gang rape of a female student inside the South Kolkata Law College campus on June 25, 2025. According to the police, the crime occurred in the security guard’s room on the premises. Four individuals have been arrested so far:
Manojeet Mishra, a student and the main accused
Jaib Ahmed and Pramit Mukherjee, fellow students
Pinaki Bandyopadhyay, a college security guard
Sources within the police department have confirmed that fresh scratch marks were discovered on Manojeet’s body during his medical examination—injuries they say are consistent with physical resistance. A police official said:
“Such injuries usually appear when a person is fighting off an attacker.”
The survivor’s medical report supports her statement, and CCTV footage has reportedly captured the accused dragging the victim through parts of the campus.
Ethics Under Scrutiny
Legal experts and social commentators are questioning the appropriateness of Ganguly’s remarks. While a defense attorney is expected to advocate for their client, many argue that casting aspersions on the survivor’s character or suggesting a romantic context to what is being investigated as a violent crime crosses a line.
Critics say that such arguments don’t just undermine the survivor’s dignity, but also risk distorting public understanding of sexual violence. Attempts to reframe an alleged assault as consensual or romantic can weaken the integrity of the judicial process and discourage survivors from coming forward.
Justice and Sensitivity Must Go Hand in Hand
The incident has once again raised serious questions about how survivors of sexual violence are treated—both in courtrooms and in the media. While every accused person has the right to legal defense, experts stress that this right should not come at the cost of victim-blaming or misinformation.
The case is ongoing, and further developments are expected in the coming weeks.
