Allowed

Beby Devi v. State of Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC21 Aug 2024BAIL APPLN./1251/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition for anticipatory bail in a POCSO and rape case where the main accused was already on bail, investigation was complete, and custodial interrogation deemed unnecessary. Bail granted with conditions including joining investigation, not influencing witnesses, and staying away from the victim's vicinity.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; release on arrest on personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety, subject to conditions.

Beby Devi Vs State of Govt. of NCT of Delhi — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 1251/2024 & CRL.M.A. 20965/2024

¶4

BEBY DEVI .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Vikas Sharma and Ms. Manvi Rajvanshy, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE OF GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the State with Insp. Imteyar Alam, PS Bawana. Ms. Tara Narula and Mr. Anirudh Ramanathan, Advocates (DHCLSC) for Prosecutrix.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

¶9

O R D E R % 21.08.2024

¶10

This petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.975/2023 under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act, PS Bawana. Since then, the investigation has been completed qua the co-accused Pawan. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the prosecutrix had levelled allegations against Pawan, husband of maternal uncle’s daughter stating she was acquainted with him and used to call him, and that he made physical relations with her on 08^th July, 2023, took objectionable photographs, threatened to make it viral, and did so subsequently when the photographs reached acquaintances and family members. She was duly scolded by her parents and consequently she had a fight with her family and left home.

¶11

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/08/2024 at 12:23:19

¶12

As per her statement, she was asked by Shambhu @ Ajay to stay at one of his acquaintances in Kirari, Suleman Nagar. She further alleged that Shambhu @ Ajay and the wife Beby Devi took her to Nangloi, in the name of marriage, when she was confined during that time. Charge-sheet has been filed.

¶13

As per the ossification test of the prosecutrix, she was found to be more than 18 years of age. Charges were framed against Pawan under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act and Section 66E of the IT Act. The said Pawan has already been enlarged on bail by the Trial Court by order dated 09^th August, 2024. As regards Ajay @ Shambhu, charges under Sections 323/344/366A/34 IPC have been framed.

¶14

As regards petitioner Beby Devi, NBWs were obtained and process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was initiated. The Court by order dated 24^th April, 2024 granted interim protection to the petitioner Beby Devi. Subsequently, the proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. were stayed by the Trial Court vide order dated 04^th June, 2024. The petitioner has since joined the investigation.

¶15

The APP for the State states on instructions of the IO that the supplementary charge-sheet is in the process of being filed against the petitioner.

¶16

The complainant is also present through her counsel. The Trial Court has recorded that per submissions made by the victim during submissions of bail, prima facie there is consensual relationship between the victim and the accused Pawan and the victim has not opposed the bail and requested for grant of bail to the accused Pawan. Though, the complainant appears through her counsel, and opposes the grant of bail, before this Court.

¶17

¶18

However, considering the totality of circumstances, also keeping in view these statements by the victim, and that the investigation is complete and the custodial interrogation is not required, and the main accused Pawan against whom charges under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act have been framed is already on bail, in the opinion of this Court, the petition be allowed.

¶19

In light of the above, the Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail. Consequently, in the event of arrest the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25, 000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/IO/SHO concerned, further subject to the condition that the petitioner will join investigation as and when directed and not influence any witness/complainant/victim or tamper with evidence of the case, and that petitioner will not visit or venture anywhere in the vicinity of the victim, victim’s house and the victim’s family members.

¶20

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Pending applications (if any) are disposed of as infructuous.

¶21

Order be given dasti .

¶22

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶23

ANISH DAYAL, J

¶24

AUGUST 21, 2024/MK

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/08/2024 at 12:23:19

Beby Devi v. State of Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Beby Devi v. State of Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopal & Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rajinder Vs the State NCT of Delhi

Rajesh Verma Vs Swati Verma & Anr.

Parvesh Goel Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Kailash Saraaf Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Mtc Jewellery

Neeraj Kumar Sharma Vs the State (Govt. of Nct) Delhi