$~45

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

+

BAIL APPLN. 577/2022

SATYENDER SRIVASTAV

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Ajit Kumar Thakur, Adv.

versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

..... Respondent

Through:

Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for the

State with SI Monika Singh, PS K.N.

Katju Marg.

Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv. for victim.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH

Talwant Singh, J.:

1. This is an application for regular bail in case FIR No.379/2019 under

Section 363 IPC registered with P.S. K.N. Katju Marg, New Delhi.

2. The case of the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated in the

present case and has been arrested on 10.01.2021 and since then he is in jail;

he is entitled to bail on the ground of parity as co-accused has already been

released on bail on 24.05.2021 and main accused Mithlesh Kashyap has been

granted interim bail by the Court of learned ASJ.

2.1

The case of the prosecution is stated to be that father of the victim

lodged the FIR on 23.09.2019 alleging that his daughter had not returned

home on 22.09.2019 and he doubted that someone may have kidnapped her

hence case under Section 363 was registered at PS K.N. Katju Marg, Delhi.

The accused Mithlesh took the prosecutrix to her home and confined her there

for a long time, where she was sexually exploited by Mithlesh Kashyap, who

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002004

was involved in a prostitution racket. Mithlesh Kashyap used to call many

persons at her house like co-accused Mukesh and present applicant.

2.2

The case of the applicant is that the he had gone there only 2-3 times.

Co-accused Mukesh has taken prosecutrix to his house from the house of

Mithlesh Kashyap on the assurance of getting married with her. The

applicant has no role in the activities of Mithlesh, prosecutrix and co-accused

Mukesh @ Vikky. He had only availed the services of the prosecutrix 2-3

times like other customers and prosecutrix had admitted in her statement that

number of persons used to come to avail prostitutional services at the house

of accused Mithlesh Kashyap. Even as per the story narrated by the victim,

the main accused is Smt. Mithlesh Kashyap, who was apprehended.

2.3

Statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

The present applicant was arrested. Charge-sheet stands filed on 04.02.2021.

The TIP was not conducted and the present applicant was arrested only on the

basis of suspicion and surmises and he is stated to be in jail since 10.01.2021.

His bail application has already been rejected by learned ASJ on 23.01.2022.

The applicant is aged about 45 years having wife and school going children;

he was running a small factory for his livelihood; nowadays there is no

earning member in the family; no custodial interrogation is required; hence

the bail has been prayed.

3. Notice was issued. Status report has been filed. It has been stated

that present petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing the bail

application No. 1908/2021, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 09.08.2021

after some arguments. Regular bail was granted to co-accused Mukesh @

Vikky in view of the role attributed by the victim. Mukesh @ Vikky who in

fact had helped the victim to come out of the house of Mithlesh Kashyap and

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002004

moreover, Mukesh @ VIkky was suffering from 70% physical disability, so

there cannot be any parity with Mukesh @ Vikky. Co-accused Mithlesh is

only on interim bail on medical grounds.

3.1

Case is stated to be at the stage of arguments on the point of charge.

The bail application has been strongly opposed on the ground that material

prosecution witnesses, including the victim, are still to be examined and

considering the gravity and seriousness of the offence there being every

likelihood of threatening and influencing the material witnesses by applicant