IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
AJAY DIGPAUL, J.
Ravinder Soni - Petitioner
Versus
State (Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. - Respondent
BAIL APPLN. 2283/2025 & CRL.M.A. 22041/2025 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 1473/2025
Decided on : 14-08-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petitioner filed for bail under serious sexual offence allegations. (Para 1) |
JUDGMENT :
AJAY DIGPAUL, J.
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023[Hereinafter “BNSS ”] seeking regular bail in connection with FIR No. 154/2025, registered under Sections 74 and 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023, [Hereinafter “BNSS ”], and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012 [Hereinafter “ POCSO ”] at Police Station Nabi Karim.
2. The case of the prosecution, as borne out from the FIR, is that on 06.02.2025, the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of the statement of the prosecutrix/victim. In her statement, she alleged that on 02.02.2025, she had gone to the market along with her sister, where at a shop, the petitioner allegedly inserted his finger in her anal region, touched her inappropriately from behind, and made obscene gestures. Subsequently, on 06.02.2025, the victim, along with her mother, located and identified the petitioner, whereupon she narrated the incident to her mother. The mother of the victim/prosecutrix is stated to have slapped the petitioner and called the PCR. Thereafter, an FIR was registered and the matter was entrusted to Sub-Inspector Shruti Dubey. The petitioner/accused was taken into custody on 07.02.2025.
3. On 07.02.2025, the statement of the prosecutrix was recorded before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Digital Court-04(NI Act), Central, Delhi under Section 183 of BNSS .
4. Thereafter, the petitioner moved an application seeking regular bail before the learned ASJ, FTSC (POCSO)-02, Central, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi in SC No. 229/2025. The petitioner’s first and second regular bail applications were dismissed vide orders dated 02.05.2025 and 06.05.2025, respectively. Subsequently, the third bail application was also dismissed by the learned ASJ, FTSC (POCSO)-01, Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, wherein the following order dated 20.05.2025 was passed:
“In the present case, the allegations against the accused are very serious in nature. Bail of the accused on merits has already been dismissed twice. The decisions relied by the Ld. Counsel for accused is distinguished on the ground that present case pertains to POCSO Act and Ld. JMFC was satisfied with the reasons and grounds of arrest of the accused at the time of first production of accused before the Court. Moreover, question regarding necessity of furnishing ground of arrest in all cases is pending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
Thus, in view of the above stated reasons, considering the gravity of offence, seriousness of the allegations levelled against the applicant/accused and strong opposition by the victim, this court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant/accused on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the present bail application stands dismissed and disposed off.
Needless to say, the above mentioned observations are based solely on the facts as alleged, and brought forth at this juncture, and are not finding on merits, and would also have no bearing on the merits of the case.”
5. Chargesheet has already been filed in the aforenoted FIR, however, the examination of the prosecutrix is still pending.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, while pressing for bail, at the outset, submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated as a retaliatory measure for his prior whistleblowing against local police officials of PS Nabi Karim.
7. It is urged that there is an inordinate delay of five days in lodging the FIR, undermining its credibility.
8. It is contended that the FIR does not disclose the ingredients of Section 4 POCSO Act, and at most, may attract Section 7 or 8 of POCSO Act.
9. The CCTV footage placed on record, Mr. Anubhav Tyagi states, establishes the petitioner’s presence at home at the relevant time, while no footage from the place of occurrence h
The court emphasized the need for careful consideration of bail applications in sexual offences involving minors, balancing the accused's rights with the victim's protection.
The court granted bail to the petitioner, emphasizing the lack of corroborative evidence and the absence of prior criminal records, despite the serious allegations under POCSO.
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 court considered the period of incarceration, completion of witness examination, and the lack of fruitful purpose in keeping the petitioner detained in prison as key factors in allowing the bail ....
Bail Application - Offence of sexual assault - Mere non-filing of charge sheet cannot be a ground for rejection of the bail, especially when no evidence has been brought on record to keep accused beh....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the gravity of allegations related to sexual exploitation, blackmail, abuse, and financial exploitation, and the court's consideration of the legal....
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.