The court granted bail to the petitioner, falsely implicated in a rape case due to a matrimonial dispute, subject to a personal bond of 25,000 with one surety.
Petitioner released on bail with a personal bond of ₹25,000 and one surety in a like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~11
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK O R D E R % 04.10.2018
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is father-inlaw of the prosecutrix. On account of matrimonial dispute between the petitioner’s son and prosecutrix, petitioner has been falsely implicated. There is a delay of about two years in registration of FIR. Prosecutrix has alleged in the FIR that petitioner had given her a Laddu laced with some intoxicating substance on 28th November, 2016. Thereafter petitioner raped her. Petitioner also made an obscene video clip by his mobile phone. Thereafter, he continued to physically exploit her by threatening her that in case she resisted he would put the video clip on the social media. It is contended that FIR has been lodged on 13th July, 2018.
Investigations are over. Petitioner has participated in the investigations. Charge-sheet has already been filed, inasmuch as, charges
have been framed and trial is underway.
Keeping in mind the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, it is ordered that in case of arrest petitioner be released on bail, subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of `25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer/SHO of the concerned police station.
Bail application is disposed of in the above terms.
Dasti.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
OCTOBER 04, 2018 ga
VIRENDRA SHARMA
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
A.K. PATHAK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
