Delhi High Court - Orders
Ravin Kumar Giri @ Santosh Giri vs State Govt. Nct Of Delhi on 7 December, 2021
Author: Mukta Gupta
Bench: Mukta Gupta
$~4 (2021)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 3740/2021
RAVIN KUMAR GIRI @ SANTOSH GIRI ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr.Ajayinder Sangwan, Mr.H.S.
Singh, Mr.Summinder Paswan and
Mr.Siddhart, Advocates.
versus
STATE GOVT. NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr.Tarang Srivastava, APP for the
State with Inspector Dinesh Kumar
Tejwan and SI Neetu Yadav, PS
Sarita Vihar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
ORDER
% 07.12.2021
1. By this petition, petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.283/2021 under Sections 376/506/34 IPC registered at PS Sarita Vihar, Delhi.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the prosecutrix was in a live-in-relationship with the brother-in-law of the petitioner, which is proved by the photographs and other documents. They have lived together as husband and wife for years and when the brother-in-law of the petitioner married in December, 2020, thereafter out of vengeance to teach the brother- in-law and all the other family members a lesson, the above-noted FIR was registered. The allegations in the above-noted FIR are totally vague as it is stated that the petitioner also had physical relationship, however, no date or time when the alleged incident took place has been mentioned. No Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE BAIL APPLN.3740/2021 PageGUPTA MUKTA 1 of 4 Signing Date:07.12.2021 21:42:34 verification and corroboration of the fact stated by the prosecutrix has been carried out. As regards the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is concerned, the same does not have any evidentiary value and is like any other statement. Learned counsel further states that the petitioner has never met the prosecutrix. Since in the first complaint filed by the prosecutrix no specific role was attributed to the petitioner, the allegations against the petitioner are unsubstantiated and no recovery is required to be made from the petitioner. Hence the petitioner be granted anticipatory bail as the allegations are vague and general.
3. In the above-noted FIR the prosecutrix stated that she was working in a developer's company since 2017 and in January, 2018 Akash Giri came for the job. Thereafter on 3/4th April he took her to a hotel in Sarita Vihar on the pretext of a meeting in relation to the real estate. When they reached the hotel, Akash Giri told her that the client will come late and he offered a drink. She became unconscious after taking the cold drink and when she woke up in the morning, she found herself without clothes. Akash Giri had raped her and prepared her video. Thereafter Akash Giri started blackmailing her showing her video and had intercourse with her without her consent, threatening her by showing the video and continued this for four years. She was forced to cooperate with him because he was blackmailing and threatening her to upload the videos on the social media. On 15th December, 2020, Akash Giri married and thereafter he did not meet the prosecutrix for about two months. Then all of sudden he surfaced and again started blackmailing her on the pretext of uploading videos and had intercourse with her. He also wanted other people to have intercourse with her and wanted to throw her into prostitution. On her objecting to the same, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE BAIL APPLN.3740/2021 PageGUPTA MUKTA 2 of 4 Signing Date:07.12.2021 21:42:34 he always threatened her of uploading her nude photographs and videos. It is also alleged that uncle of Akash Giri namely Ajay Giri, Ritik Giri and Santosh Giri, i.e. the present petitioner also raped her after blackmailing her. It is alleged that Akash Giri finally uploaded her videos showing her as a prostitute and on seeing the video the brother of the prosecutrix tried to commit suicide. Thereafter, he was sending filthy messages and abuses. Thus she lodged the above noted FIR.
4. After registration of the FIR, statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate wherein she clarified that Akash Giri took her to Bihar in August, 2019 where he committed sexual intercourse with her every day number of times and in case his family asked him not to do so, he would beat his family members. He used to make people video call her and tell her to show her body and on not showing the same, he would beat her. It is at that time the prosecutrix alleges that when she was at Bihar her brother-in-law i.e. the present petitioner, also came and at the night, established physical relations with her when Akash Giri was standing on the gate and did not do anything despite her shouting. It is further alleged that 15 days later Akash's brother Ritik also established physical relation with her. She tried to run away from the said house however, she was caught and taken back to the house where she was assaulted and made to sign on blank papers and thus had to stay further. Thereafter again she escaped from the said place and told one person in the village when Akash sought five days' time to perform the marriage and thereafter he took her to Surat and in November, 2020 brought her to Delhi. As per the prosecutrix when she was making her complaint it was told to her that the same was a draft complaint and thus all the facts were not Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE BAIL APPLN.3740/2021 PageGUPTA MUKTA 3 of 4 Signing Date:07.12.2021 21:42:34 stated therein.
5. Considering the fact that in the FIR itself the petitioner has been named as one of the person who had forcibly established relationship with the prosecutrix without her consent and also that the time when it was performed was stated in detail in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as also during the course of investigation it was found out that there were obscene photographs and videos of the prosecutrix in the mobile phone of Akash which he had also uploaded on the facebook, this Court finds no ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Petition is dismissed.
7. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
DECEMBER 07, 2021 'vn' Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE BAIL APPLN.3740/2021 PageGUPTA MUKTA 4 of 4 Signing Date:07.12.2021 21:42:34