Point of Law: Anticipatory bail granted – Rape - Court should be loath to reject grant of anticipatory bail in as much unless and until there is an imminent and a great imperative to have a custodial interrogation of an accused, the anticipatory bail does not deserve to be denied.

ORDER :

RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J.

1. The present bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.292/2020, dated 16.10.2020 under Section 376/328/506 IPC registered at P.S. Patparganj, Industrial Area, Delhi.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the present case are that on 16/10/2020, victim/complainant came to PS Patparganj Industrial Area, and submitted a hand written complaint in which she stated that she used to live with her parents in Mandawali, Delhi. Her father was in Delhi Police. In May-June 2014, she along with her parents had gone to Shrinagar for LTC vacations and during this tour she came in contact with accused Sandeep (hereinafter called as “petitioner”), who was also on the same LTC tour with his family. Petitioner was also from Delhi Police. During this LTC tour petitioner became familiar with her family and he used to call her sister". Petitioner also obtained her mobile phone number by making a 'missed call' on his phone number from her mobile phone number. After return from LTC tour petitioner used to make phone calls on her phone and during one of such phone call conversation petitioner told her that his wife and daughter wants to meet her. Petitioner fixed that meeting at 'Akash Hotel located in Patparganj area. Petitioner’s daughter also talked to her and told 'Bua aap aa jao'. After that petitioner told her to go to a particular room at 'Akash Hotel'. As per phone conversation she reached that particular room where only petitioner was present and he bolted the room from inside. When she asked petitioner about the absence of his wife and daughter he told that they are down stairs. Petitioner offered cold drink to her and after that complainant became unconscious. During her unconsciousness petitioner raped her. He also took nude photographs and video of complainant. After 3-4 Hours she re-gained consciousness but by that time petitioner had again put on her clothes. After some days petitioner again called her and asked her to come to meet him but she refused. Upon this petitioner threatened her either to come to meet him or he will put her objectionable photographs and videos on 'net'. Under these circumstances she agreed to meet petitioner and when she went to meet him, he showed her the objectionable photographs and videos and again raped her at the same place i.e. Akash Hotel. As per complaint similar incidents took place with complainant about 10-15 times.

3. In 2016 complainant got married to 'S' and complainant asked petitioner to now delete her objectionable photographs and videos but he again threatened & blackmailed her to show those photographs and videos to her husband and in-laws and even after marriage petitioner made sexual relations with complainant. Petitioner even sent those objectionable photographs on the mobile phone of complainant but he deleted those photographs by adopting the process of 'delete everyone' on whatsapp. Finally, finding no way out; complainant shared these facts with her husband and lodged present complaint for necessary legal action against petitioner. Accordingly, the present case U/s 376/328/506 IPC was registered.

4. I have heard Ld. Sr. counsel for the petitioner, Ld. APP for the State, Ld. counsel for the complainant, who assisted the Ld. APP for the State and also perused the records of this case.

5. It is submitted by the Ld. Sr. counsel for the petitioner that there is a delay of 6 years in lodging the FIR as the alleged incident took place in the year 2014 and the FIR has been registered in the year 2020. It is further submitted by the Ld. Sr. counsel for the petitioner that the complainant has failed to give any date, time and month of the alleged offence. It is further submitted by him that the petitioner has joined the investigation at about 8-9 times and has been co-operating in the investigation. It is further submitted by the Ld. Sr. counsel that the charge sheet has already been filed and there a