The court emphasized the gravity of the allegations and the specific incidents of forced sexual relationships, administration of steroids, and rape by multiple persons in reaching its decision.

JUDGMENT

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. (Oral)--The instant application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C.') has been filed on behalf of applicant seeking grant of regular bail in FIR bearing no. 88/2023, registered at Police Station Maidan Garhi, Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 376/376D/498A/323/354/109/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC').

2. Issue notice. Mr. Manoj Pant, learned APP accepts notice on behalf of State.

3. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that the present FIR was registered on the allegations that the victim in this case who was married to the present accused/applicant in the year 2015, was continuously being harassed for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry by the petitioner though her father had given Rs.5 lakhs to the present accused/applicant. On 06.07.2016, after she was blessed with a baby boy, the applicant who is her mother-in-law had refused to let her stay with them and had asked her to kill the new born baby. She had, therefore, kept the baby at her mother's home. Her brother-in-law had molested her on many occasions and when she had complained to her husband and mother-in-law, they had beaten her. When her son was three years old, she was asked to arrange Rs.10 lakhs for a shop which was to be run by applicant, and she was able to give Rs.5 lakhs to them and it was only thereafter that she was brought back to her in-laws home, but she was not allowed to meet her child. Her husband had opened a shop of supplements/steroids and had started giving her some medicines/steroids forcibly on the pretext that she was very weak physically, and after taking the same, she used to feel dizzy and her brother-in-law also used to indulge in touching her inappropriately and used to finger her in her private parts. Her mother-in-law and applicant had beaten her when she had informed them about it and had told her that they will not let her meet her child. In January, 2021, when she was at her mother's home, the applicant had come to take her back to matrimonial home and had given her an injection in the car due to which she had started feeling dizzy. He had taken her to Chattarpur, a where a Nigerian boy also joined them in the car. The applicant had stopped the car at the road-side and that boy and the present applicant had raped her in the car. The Nigerian boy had given money to the applicant in lieu of the sexual assault. The applicant had threatened her not to disclose anything to anyone or he will ruin her father's political career. In February, 2021, the applicant had told her that they will be going out for dinner and had again given her an injection due to which she felt dizzy, after which he had taken her to a hotel and had forcibly taken off her clothes, and she had felt no energy in her body. A boy had, thereafter, come to the room, and the applicant and that boy had raped her. Thereafter, she was again brought back to her matrimonial home. Later, the applicant had shown her inappropriate video of the sexual assault in his phone which contained her inappropriate photographs and had threatened to show the video to everyone, due to which she had become mentally stressed. Thereafter, the applicant used to give her medicines and injections and used to take her to that hotel on many occasions where she was raped by different persons. She was also forced to send text messages to different persons through her phone. On 11.02.2023, the applicant had again asked her to go to the same hotel again, however, she had run away from home with her child and had disclosed everything to her parents and police. She has also alleged that the accused persons used to insert bottles etc. in her private parts.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that it is purely a matrimonial dispute between the parties which has been given colour of gang rape. It is also stated that the prosecutrix has given different versions in the FIR and in the statement recorded und