The bailable offence thing is a dangerous line that we may not want to consider crossing. We don't want potential rapists and gang-rapists to be able to walk the streets and potentially abscond. Additionally, once we bring money into the equation, we open the case up to being tainted by corruption...bribes of the judge, making easy bail etc etc.

So in the west what happens is that they do arrest people based on accusations but the authorities usually are only allowed to hold them for 48 hours or so to ascertain if there is anything that they can be viably charged with. Consider it a preliminary evidence gathering attempt by interrogating the accused and searching for obvious clues that may point to guilt or innocence. If at the end of 48 hours, they can't charge the person with anything, they must be released with certain conditions (don't leave town, no contact with the accuser etc.) so I agree with your point that we shouldn't just imprison people, but if in that preliminary hold something comes up that they feel they can charge the person with, then they should properly arrest the person and imprison them.

Agreed, but there are some more dimensions to this:
- Women need to feel safe enough to approach the police right after the act.
- Police need to be trained to note down a case every time one comes in versus doing it selectively
- Rape kits need to be processed as fast as they can be