$~14

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

BAIL APPLN. 1711/2023

MANOJ KUMAR

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv.

versus

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr. Amit Sahni, APP for State.

%

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

J U D G M E N T

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J. (Oral)

1.

The present application has been filed seeking grant of bail in case

FIR No. 377/2022 under Sections 363/354A IPC read with Section 10

of POSCO Act registered at PS Govind Puri, New Delhi.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present FIR has

been lodged on account of the previous enmity between the families.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the MLC on

record there was no penetration and that except legs, no other part of

the prosecutrix/victim was touched.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused is in

custody since 30.06.2022 and since the charge-sheet has already been

Digitally Signed By:RAJ

BALA

Signing Date:25.07.2023

19:43:10

Signature Not Verified

filed and the trial may take a long time therefore, the petitioner may

be admitted to bail.

4.

On the last date, notice was issued to the prosecutrix/victim as per

office report, victim has duly been served through her guardian.

However, none is present on her behalf.

5.

Learned APP for the state has vehemently opposed the bail

application on the ground that the victim was only 6 years old.

Learned APP for the state submits that even it is not the case of the

prosecution that it was a case of penetration. Learned APP submits

that in view of the age of the prosecutrix, the petitioner may not be

admitted to bail.

6.

I have considered the submissions.

7.

The court always faces a moral dilemma in such cases while

considering the application for bail. The allegations on the face of it

are serious in nature. However, on the basis of the FIR, the only

allegation against the accused is that the grandmother of the

prosecutrix found the victim and the accused with their payjami and

trouser, respectively, down while the accused was sitting on his knees.

Thereafter, in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. there are

allegations of touching of the accused’s mouth to the genitals of

prosecutrix. The allegations are really serious in nature. This court is

of the view that it cannot examine the probative value of the witnesses

at this stage. The same are yet to be appreciated by the learned Trial

Court.

8.

The accused is around 35 years of age. Without going into the merits

Digitally Signed By:RAJ

BALA

Signing Date:25.07.2023

19:43:10

Signature Not Verified

of the case and taking into account the peculiar facts and

circumstances, the petitioner is admitted to court bail on furnishing a

personal bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to

the satisfaction of learned Trial Court subject to the following

conditions:

(a)Petitioner shall not threaten, intimidate or contact the prosecution

witnesses nor shall even visit the locality where the victim or her

family are residing.

(b)The petitioner shall report to the IO on every Thursday at 05:00

PM till the conclusion of the trial.

(c)The petitioner shall disclose his mobile number and residential

address to the court and shall intimate in case there is any change

in the residential address.

9.

The learned trial court may also impose any further condition as

suitable for procuring the presence of the accused during the trial.

10.The petition stands disposed of.

11.

Copy to be sent to the jail superintendent concerned.

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J

JULY 25, 2023/AR

Digitally Signed By:RAJ

BALA

Signing Date:25.07.2023

19:43:10

Signature Not Verified