SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Del) 2342

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Subramonium Prasad, J.
Sandeep Mourya - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Bail Application No. 838 of 2021
Decided On : 22-03-2021

Advocates appeared:
Mohit Mathur, Advocate, Prakash, Advocate, Meenakshi Chauhan, Advocate, Zeenat Malick, Advocate

The legal principle established is that consent must involve active and reasoned deliberation, and a false promise of marriage must be given in bad faith with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was given.

Headnote:

Bail - Section 438 Cr.P.C. - Offences under Section 376 and 328 IPC - Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, (2019) 9 SCC 608

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed for bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in relation to FIR No.44/2021 for offences under Section 376 and 328 IPC. The prosecutrix alleged that the petitioner established a physical relationship with her on the promise of marriage.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found contradictions in the prosecutrix's initial and subsequent versions. It observed that there was no evidence of a promise of marriage and that the consent given by the prosecutrix for the physical relationship would be decided in trial.

Issues: Consent given by the prosecutrix, promise of marriage, and establishment of physical relationship.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court referred to the legal position on consent and false promise of marriage as established in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra, (2019) 9 SCC 608.

Final Decision: The Court granted bail to the petitioner with specific conditions, emphasizing that the observations were only for the purpose of bail and not on the merits of the case.

JUDGMENT

Subramonium Prasad, J. - This application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of bail in the event of arrest of the petitioner in FIR No.44/2021 dated 28.01.2021 registered in Police Station Hauz Khas for offences punishable under Section 376 and 328 IPC.

2. The prosecutrix gave a complaint on 28.01.2021, stating as under:

    a) Her father, late Mukesh Kumar, suffered heart attack on the night of 02.01.2019 and he was taken to the Safdarjung Hospital where the petitioner herein was the duty doctor. It is stated in the FIR that during the course of the treatment, the petitioner came to the residence of the prosecutrix and gave his profile for the purpose of marriage and asked for the profile of the prosecutrix.

      b) It is stated that on 09.06.2020, the petitioner called the prosecutrix to come to Yusuf Sarai/Gautam Nagar so that they can get to know each other. She stated that she reached there at about 11 AM. It is stated that the petitioner told her that since she is interested in painting and sketching he will take her to his friend's flat. It is stated that the prosecutrix objected to come with him to the flat but the petitioner stated that his friend is also a doctor. She stated that when she reached the flat of Dr. Kisan she was given some cold drink after which she does not remember anything. It is stated that when she regained consciousness she was having pain in her stomach. It is stated that when she became alright she realised that she had been raped and when she confronted the petitioner she was threatened that a video had been taken by the petitioner and would be made viral.

        c) It is stated that on 17.06.2020, the petitioner called the prosecutrix to a Hotel in Green Park, Yousuf Sarai, and again raped her.

          d) It is stated that on 16.09.2020, again the prosecutrix was called to a Hotel where she was raped again. It is stated in the complaint that the prosecutrix has been threatened that the video which was taken would be made viral.

            e) On her complaint FIR No.44/2021 dated 28.01.2021, was registered at Police Station Hauz Khas for offences punishable under Section 376 and 328 IPC.

            3. The petitioner approached the Sessions Court by filing a bail application. A Status Report was filed by the Police repeating the contents of the FIR. In the proceedings it was contended that the prosecutrix's father had suffered heart attack on 02.01.2019 and was brought to the hospital by the sister of the prosecutrix and during the said period, the sister of the prosecutrix was in constant touch with the petitioner. It is stated in the said order that the petitioner had requested the sister of the prosecutrix, who is a lab technician, to look for a job for his friend. The order records that in the month of May, 2020, the sister of the prosecutrix asked the petitioner as to whether he has married and then she requested the petitioner to find some eligible bachelor for her sister. The order records that the prosecutrix came to meet the petitioner and thereafter they established sexual relationship. The order also records that there were several instances of consensual sexual relationship and WhatsApp messages were exchanged. The bail application was rejected by an order dated 06.03.2021, on the ground that sexual relationship was established between the petitioner and the prosecutrix of the promise of marriage and therefore anticipatory bail could not be granted to the petitioner.

            4. The petitioner has approached this Court by filing another application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail. Notice was issued on 10.03.2021. Status report has been filed.

            5. It is stated in the Status Report that during the course of the investigation material has been collected from the places where the petitioner and the prosecutrix have established sexual relationship. It has also been stated in the Status Report that the statement of the sister of the prosecutrix was recorded and it does not match with the statement of the pros

                                    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                                    1
                                    2
                                    3
                                    4
                                    5
                                    6
                                    7
                                    8
                                    9
                                    10
                                    11
                                    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                                    supreme today icon
                                    logo-black

                                    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                                    Please visit our Training & Support
                                    Center or Contact Us for assistance

                                    qr

                                    Scan Me!

                                    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                                    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                                    whatsapp-icon Back to top