Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 4552

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J.
Vikas Malu – Appellant
Versus
State of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
Bail Appln. 789 of 2023 AND Cr.M.A. 6284 of 2023
Decided On : 19-05-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Pradeep Jain, Mr. R. K. Thakur, Mr. Shubhankar Jha, Mr. Ashish Bansal and Mr. Sambhav Jain, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with Insp. Manjusha, PS R.K. Puram.
Mr. Rajender Chhabra and Mr. Rajesh Chhabra, Advocates for the complainant along with complainant in person.

The court's decision highlighted the importance of considering the totality of facts and circumstances, including the delay in filing the FIR, inconsistencies in the victim's allegations, and the petitioner's cooperation in the investigation, when granting anticipatory bail in serious criminal cases.

Headnote:
Anticipatory Bail - Criminal Law - Sections 323/354/376/377/506/509/34 IPC - The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving serious allegations of rape, threats, and assault against the petitioner and his family members. The court considered the totality of facts and circumstances, including the delay in filing the FIR, the petitioner's cooperation in the investigation, and inconsistencies in the victim's allegations. The court imposed conditions for the petitioner's release on bail.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of rape, threats, and assault against him and his family members. The victim alleged that she was raped, threatened, and assaulted by the petitioner, his son, and his daughters. The petitioner argued that the allegations were baseless and fabricated, pointing to inconsistencies in the victim's claims and the delay in filing the FIR.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the delay in filing the FIR, inconsistencies in the victim's allegations, and the petitioner's cooperation in the investigation raised doubts about the veracity of the allegations. The court also considered evidence presented by the petitioner, including photographs and documents, which contradicted the victim's claims.
Issues: The key issues in the case included the credibility of the victim's allegations, the delay in filing the FIR, the petitioner's cooperation in the investigation, and the evidence presented by both parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision to grant anticipatory bail was based on the totality of facts and circumstances, including the delay in filing the FIR, inconsistencies in the victim's allegations, and the petitioner's cooperation in the investigation. The court also considered evidence presented by the petitioner, which raised doubts about the veracity of the allegations.
Final Decision: The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. and imposed conditions for his release, including cooperation in the investigation, restrictions on leaving the country, non-threatening behavior, and non-tampering with evidence.

ORDER

Rajnish Bhatnagar, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 525/2022 under Sections 323/354/376/377/506/509/34 IPC registered at Police Station Kapashera.

2. In brief the facts of the case are that on 15.11.2022, the complainant filed a written complaint at Police Station Kapashera alleging therein that she was raped and threatened by her husband (petitioner herein) and co- accused Vineet Malu (son of petitioner herein). Further in the said written complaint it is also alleged that she was molested and beaten by two daughters of petitioner and on the said complaint, the present FIR No.525/2022 was registered under Sections 323/354/376/377/34 IPC against the petitioner, his son and his two daughters.

3. It is alleged that in February 2019, the petitioner called the complainant for some event discussions at A-15, Pushpanjali Farm, Bijwasan, Delhi and offered her a hard drink which she refused and thereafter, the petitioner felt offended and started mercilessly beating her and forcibly raped her at the above said place and made video of the incident.

4. It is further alleged that when the complainant refused to surrender before the present petitioner, it was then the present petitioner proposed the complainant for marriage. It is further alleged that on 13.03.2019, the court marriage was solemnized before SDM, Jhandewalan. It is further alleged that on the above said day, the present petitioner forcibly made unnatural physical relations with the complainant.

5. It is further alleged that the present petitioner forced the complainant to sleep on the same bed alongwith Vineet (son of the petitioner) by her side and petitioner on the other side, due to which she felt very uncomfortable as she was sandwiched between both of them and she would feel an unwelcomed touch and the son of the petitioner always took advantage of this and touched her inappropriately during whole night.

6. It is further alleged that complainant could always feel a change in the behavioural aspect of Vineet (son of the petitioner) who deliberately and intentionally used to touch the complainant inappropriately and many times she asked him to restrict his movements but he always ignored her. On 11.08.2022, the complainant made the petitioner aware about the bad behaviour of his children and also made him hear the recordings. It was then on 14.08.2022, daughters of the petitioner molested the complainant by ordering her to walk on her hands and legs like an animal and when complainant refused the same, then Harshita (daughter of the petitioner) said "Chal Saali Ko Maza Chakhate Hain, Hamare Order Ko Mana Kar Rahi Hai" and thereafter both the daughters of the petitioner pinned down the complainant to the floor and further Sakshi (daughter of petitioner) held both the hands of the complainant and Harshita started slapping on her face and when the complainant became semi-conscious, Sakshi spread her legs and she further inserted her middle finger in vagina of complainant and thereafter forcibly put those fingers in the mouth of complainant.

7. It is further alleged that on 17.10.2022 son of the petitioner, namely, Vineet Malu entered the room of the complainant, forcibly held her and forced her to sit on his lap, and when she refused and tried to escape, the son of the petitioner raped her and also made the video of the incident and threatened her not to disclose this incident to anyone otherwise she will have to face the consequences.

8. It is further alleged that the complainant was continuously threatened by the petitioner and his relatives of dire consequences that she would be killed through accident or though professional murderers and they also threatened her to make the video of the incident viral. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present case was registered.

9. I have heard Ld. counsel for the petitioner as well as Ld. APP for the State. The co