SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6605

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J
Mohd Mubarak – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
BAIL APPLN. 4956/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sumit Sharma, Narender, Raju Thakur
For the Respondents: Naresh Kumar Chahar

At the bail stage, courts do not minutely sift evidence or credibility of witnesses; in grave offences like sexual assault, bail is generally denied once trial has commenced and is at an advanced stage, especially where the accused exploited the victim's vulnerability.

Headnote:(A) Bail - Sexual Offences - Grave allegations of sexual assault under the guise of faith healing - Consideration of the vulnerability of the victim and the breach of trust by the accused constitutes a strong ground for denial of bail. (Para 8)

(B) Appreciation of Evidence - Stage of Bail - Credibility of witnesses, contradictions in testimonies, and probative value of evidence are matters for trial and cannot be minutely sifted at the stage of considering a bail application. (Para 10)

(C) Trial Progress - Advanced Stage - In grave offences like rape, courts should be hesitant to entertain bail applications once the trial has commenced and prosecution witnesses are being examined. (Para 11)

Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail considering the gravity of the offence and the advanced stage of the trial.

Table of Content
1. facts regarding fir for sexual assault under ipc and pocso act via faith healing. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. competing arguments on right to speedy trial versus gravity of offence. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court's finding on accused exploiting victim's vulnerability and family's trust. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. legal standard that evidence is not sifting at bail stage and caution in granting bail during advanced trial. (Para 10 , 11)
5. denial of bail based on gravity of offence and trial stage, requesting expedited trial. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)

ORDER

1. The present application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. 553/2019, registered at Police Station Prem Nagar, Delhi, for commission of offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter ‘IPC’) and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereafter ‘POCSO Act’).

2. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that on 09.10.2019, a PCR call regarding sexual assault upon a girl was received at Police Station Prem Nagar. Thereafter, the prosecutrix, along with her parents, came to the police station, where a counsellor was called and her counselling was conducted in the presence of her parents. In her statement, the prosecutrix stated that as she had been unwell for several years, her family believed that she was under the influence of some evil spirit and, therefore, they had started taking her to faith healers. On the advice of her father’s friend, Rahman, her father had taken her to the present accused/applicant Mohd. Mubarak, who was stated to be a Maulvi residing in Mubarakpur, for treatment on 08.10.2019. She alleged that during the treatment, the accused had asked her strange and inappropriate questions and later visited her house in the evening, where he insisted on treating her alone. It was alleged that the accused told her that she was under the influence of a jinn and that it could only be removed through obscene acts, after which he asked her to remove her undergarments and committed sexual assault upon her. Out of fear, she did not disclose the incident immediately, but narrated the same to her mother the next morning, following which the police was informed. Thereafter, the prosecutrix was medically examined at SGM Hospital, Mangolpuri, and on the basis of her statement and medical examination, the present FIR for offence under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act was registered.

3. During investigation, the applicant herein was arrested, medically examined, and the relevant exhibits were seized and deposited in the malkhana. The statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. was also recorded before the learned Magistrate, wherein she disclosed repeated sexual assault, pursuant to which Section 4 of the POCSO Act was substituted with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The school records of the prosecutrix were obtained and her date of birth was found to be 24.11.2002. The exhibits were sent to FSL for DNA profiling and, after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the learned Sessions Court, where the matter is presently pending trial.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 10.10.2019, i.e., for more than six years, which amounts to an infringement of his right to personal liberty and right to speedy trial. It is argued that the investigation in the present case stands complete, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the material witnesses have been examined before the learned Sessions Court. Out of 18 prosecution witnesses, 12 witnesses have already been examined, including the prosecutrix (PW-1), her father (PW-2), and her mother (PW-3), who are the crucial witnesses in the matter. It is argued that the forensic reports have also been placed on record and, therefore, there is no possibility of tampering with evide

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top