IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Talwant Singh, J.
Gaurav Arora - Appellant
Versus
State of NCT Delhi - Respondent
Bail Appln. 3252 of 2021
Decided On : 22-03-2022
IPC - Section 354: Deals with assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty. POCSO Act - Section 8: Deals with sexual assault on a child. The court considers these sections in the context of the allegations made against the petitioner and finds lack of evidence to support the charges.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in a case filed under Section 354 of IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act. The petitioner claims that the allegations made against him are false and that the complainant is using the case as a means to extort money. The petitioner has participated in the investigation and has a clean record. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail to avoid arrest.
Finding of the Court:
The court notes that the alleged incident occurred on 22.06.2021, but the FIR was lodged on 14.08.2021. The court finds that the allegations of eve-teasing and misappropriation of gold jewelry made by the complainant are false. The court opines that this is a case of matrimonial discord and that the complainant may be using the child as a means to settle scores. The court finds no reason for custodial interrogation of the petitioner as he has cooperated with the investigation. The court grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner based on the lack of evidence supporting the allegations and the petitioner's cooperation in the investigation.
Result: The petitioner is granted anticipatory bail with certain conditions, including not influencing witnesses and appearing before the investigating officer and trial court when required. The court clarifies that its observations have no bearing on the merits of the case and that the case should be duly investigated by the police and trial court.
JUDGMENT
Talwant Singh, J. The petitioner has moved this application seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 1048/2021 under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to `IPC') and Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to `POCSO Act') at PS Nihal Vihar.
2. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the marriage of the applicant/accused with the complainant was solemnized in the year 2009. It was love-cum-arranged marriage and as such the same was dowry-less. Out of this wedlock, two children were born; a baby girl on 07.09.2014 and a boy on 16.10.2018. Since beginning, the behaviour of the complainant was not good towards the applicant and her mother. She was pressurizing the applicant to sell the matrimonial home, which was registered in the name of the mother of the applicant.
2.1. On 23.06.2021, the complainant made a complainant to police that the applicant had kidnapped her son on which applicant was called to the police station where he had stated that he and his son had gone to a shop at the instance of his son. The matter was resolved. The complainant went away with the children after taking her jewellery on 24.06.2021 extending threat that she will drag the applicant and his family members by filing false cases. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a complaint alleging demand of dowry. The applicant attended CAW Cell on each and every date of hearing. The efforts for conciliation made at CAW Cell failed as complainant flatly refused to join the company of the applicant on 10.08.2021. Thereafter the complainant went to police station at Nihal Vihar on 14.08.2021 and she levelled allegation of sexual assault committed by the applicant. The applicant was telephonically called to the police station and the complainant was asked to give a written complaint. The applicant satisfied the queries made by the police officials and had joined the investigation. At about 9 PM he was released by the police officials with further direction to join investigation on 16.08.2021. The applicant visited the police station on 12 `O' clock on 16.08.2021, where he was detained in the police station till 9 PM. Later on he was released with a direction to visit the police station as and when directed. The applicant was not provided with the copy of the complaint/FIR.
2.2. On 17.07.2019, the applicant moved an application before this Court for directing the police to supply copy of the FIR, upon which the Hon'ble Court directed the IO to provide the copy of the FIR to counsel for the applicant. On 19.08.2021, the copy of the FIR was mailed to him and after going through the content of the same, it came to the knowledge of the applicant that certain false allegations were made against him, which are totally false and frivolous and the girl child has been tutored by the complainant to depose against the applicant with intention to extort money from the applicant by creating pressure of arrest. No such incident had ever occurred or could not be presumed to have taken place as the entire family members were present in the said room.
2.3. It is further submitted that the case lodged against the applicant is a misuse of process of law in order to satisfy personal goal of the complainant. Initially, the applicant had moved his anticipatory bail application before learned ASJ but the same was dismissed on 26.08.2021. The applicant apprehends danger of his arrest; hence the present petition has been moved. No custodial interrogation is required as the applicant has already participated and cooperated in the investigation, which is almost complete. The applicant has clean antecedent and has been never involved in the commission of any crime. No recovery is to be made at the instance of the applicant; the applicant has undertaken not to induce any person acquainted with the facts of the case and further not to tamper with the evidence or the witnesses in any manner and
Anticipatory bail can be granted when there is lack of evidence supporting the allegations and the petitioner has cooperated in the investigation.
Anticipatory bail can be granted in cases where the allegations are found to be false and there is no need for custodial interrogation. The court should consider the facts of the case and the partici....
Criminal Law - Seeking to grant anticipatory bail - Section 438 Cr.P.C. protects the right to life and personal liberty of such persons by providing them with a remedy against frivolous detention. In....
The importance of personal liberty and the need to consider the totality of circumstances before denying anticipatory bail.
The conduct of the accused is critical in determining anticipatory bail; misuse of interim protection can lead to denial of bail.
The court's decision on the grant of anticipatory bail is based on the nature and gravity of the offences, the role of the petitioner, and the facts of the case.
The judicial system cannot be used to facilitate marriages or be manipulated for personal gain. The truth must prevail through investigation.
Criminal Law - Statement of victim – Admissibility of - Statement of victim recorded U/s P.C is concerned, this is not stage to analyze such improvements and to form an opinion because at this stage,....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.