Point of law : Rape is not merely a physical assault; it is often destructive of the whole personality of the survivor. The act of rape has the ability to scar the mental psyche of the survivor and this trauma can persist for years.

JUDGMENT :

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C seeking bail in FIR No.354/2020 dated 01.08.2020, registered at Police Station Jyoti Nagar for offences under Sections 323/376/506/313/377/354/34 IPC.

2. Facts, in brief, leading to the present petition are as under : –

(a) The instant FIR was lodged on the statement of the prosecutrix wherein she stated that she got married to one Asheem Raja S/o Shri Ahshan Ali (the petitioner herein) R/o H.No.219/7, Kardampuri, Delhi on 23.03.2019 according to Muslim Rites and Customs. It is stated that after sometime her in-laws started to harass her but she remained silent. It is stated that her mother-in-law is no more. She stated that her husband used to beat her and he had subjected her to unnatural sex several times. It is stated that the prosecutrix came to know that her husband was having an affair with some other woman and therefore, she tried to make him understand, but he did not listen to her. It is stated that thereafter she informed the petitioner herein, about her husband. It is stated that the petitioner assured her that he would talk to her husband. It is stated that the husband of the prosecutrix remained out of house for several days and only the prosecutrix and the petitioner used to reside in the house and he would behave in a very pleasant manner with her. It is stated that on 24.06.2020 the petitioner asked her to make tea. It is stated that when she went to the room of the petitioner to give him tea, the petitioner herein caught hold of her hand, and pulled her towards him and raped her. It is stated that the petitioner threatened her with dire consequences if she told anyone about the incident. It is stated that out of fear the prosecutrix could not muster the courage to tell her parents about the incident. It is stated that the petitioner raped her on 2-3 occasions. It is stated that the prosecutrix became tensed. It is stated that one day when the brother-in-law of the prosecutrix enquired as to why she was sad, she revealed the entire story to him. It is stated that the brother-in-law of the prosecutrix told her that he would talk to the petitioner and assured her that everything would be fine. It is stated that after that day the behaviour of her brother-in-law changed and that on several occasions, her brother-in-law tried to touch the prosecutrix inappropriately. It is stated that at last the prosecutrix told her parents evertything and asked them to come and take her along. On the complaint of the prosecutrix, FIR No.354/2020 dated 01.08.2020, was registered at Police Station Jyoti Nagar for offences under Sections 323/376 IPC.

(b) The petitioner was arrested on 01.08.2020.

(c) Charge-sheet was filed on 24.09.2020

(d) The petitioner filed an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail. The same was dismissed by the learned ASJ, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts on 08.06.2021.

(e) Thereafter the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant bail application.

3. Heard Mr. Gaurav Kochar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Kusum Dhalla, learned APP for the State and Mr. Yogesh Gaur, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the material on record.

4. Mr. Gaurav Kochar, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the petitioner is a 65 years old man having ailments. He states that charge-sheet has been filed. He further states that the instant case arises out of a matrimonial dispute where the prosecutrix has tried to implicate everybody in the family. He further states that the incident took place on 24.06.2020 but the FIR was lodged only on 01.08.2020. He states that no explanation has been given by the prosecutrix for the delay. He states that the prosecutrix has made allegations against the petitioner who is the father-in-law and also against the brother-in-law. He states that in fact the prosecutrix has refused to have internal examination. He states that it has bee