Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Surestha – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
Bail Appln. 3003 of 2023
Decided On : 05-09-2023
BAIL APPLICATION - Anticipatory Bail for Serious Allegations - The court considered a bail application seeking anticipatory bail in a case involving grave allegations of a minor child being beaten, disrobed, and given electric shock by the husband of the applicant. The court issued directions for the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer and disposed of the application.
Fact of the Case:
The bail application was filed seeking anticipatory bail in a case involving serious allegations of a minor child being beaten, disrobed, and given electric shock by the husband of the applicant.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the gravity of the allegations, the petitioner's responsibility for four children, and the non-appearance of the petitioner before the trial court. The court issued directions for the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer and disposed of the application.
Issues: The issues involved the seriousness of the allegations, the petitioner's responsibility for four children, and the non-appearance of the petitioner before the trial court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the gravity of the allegations, the petitioner's responsibility for four children, and the non-appearance of the petitioner before the trial court.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the bail application and issued directions for the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.A. 24121/2023
1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
BAIL APPLN. 3003/2023
3. Present bail application has been filed under section 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 359/2023 dated 18.06.2023 registered under Sections 323/341 IPC r/w Section 75 J.J. Act at PS Govind Puri. Later, section 12 of POCSO Act was also added.
4. The allegations in the FIR are quite grave and strange in nature. As per the FIR the victim, a minor child aged 7 yrs, was beaten & disrobed by the husband of the applicant in public. Allegations were also levelled that the victim was given electric shock. It was alleged that the victim child used to ring the doorbell of people in the neighbourhood at night, and that he rang the doorbell of the house of the petitioner, where she resides along with her husband and children.
5. On the night of the incident at around 01:00 AM when the child rang the bell of the petitioner, the husband of the petitioner i.e. co-accused Amit got so angry that he apprehended the child, disrobed him, gave him beatings and also gave him electric shock.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the allegations levelled are against the husband of the petitioner and not the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that even as per the FIR the offence of POCSO are not made out.
7. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has four children and there is nobody to take care of the children if the petitioner is taken into custody.
8. Issue notice.
9. Learned APP for the State has accepted the notice and vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground of the nature and gravity of the allegations. It has been submitted that despite issuance of notice, the petitioner did not appear before the learned Trial Court. It has been further submitted that even NBWs have been issued against the petitioner.
10. Let the status report be filed.
11. In the meanwhile, learned counsel undertakes that the petitioner shall appear before the IO as and when called.
12. Let the petitioner appear before the IO as and when directed. In case IO feels the necessity of affecting arrest of the petitioner/accused, IO shall give four weeks' notice to the petitioner.
13. In view of directions, the application stands disposed of
The court considered the seriousness of the allegations and the petitioner's responsibility for four children in deciding the bail application.
The court considered the period of detention and the seriousness of the allegations in deciding to admit the petitioner to court bail.
The seriousness of the allegations, cooperation in the investigation, and verification of the victim's age are crucial factors in considering anticipatory bail applications.
The presumption of guilt under the POCSO Act applies, and the significant age difference between the accused and the victim renders the alleged crime particularly heinous.
The court considered the grounds for granting bail, including the prima facie case, the possibility of the accused being away from the cause of justice, and the possibility of intimidating or threate....
The seriousness of allegations, age of the victim, victim's statements, and medical evidence are crucial factors in deciding bail applications in cases of sexual assault on minors.
Point of Law : Power under section 438 is an important tool for court to protect personal liberty of persons, which is one of fundamental rights guaranteed under Constitution of India.
The testimony of the prosecutrix for an offence under Section 376 of the IPC does not require corroboration as long as it inspires confidence, but corroboration is essential for allegations under the....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
