Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Harmeet Singh @ Prince vs The State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 10 January, 2022

Author: Manoj Kumar Ohri

Bench: Manoj Kumar Ohri

                         $~6.
                         *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                         +      BAIL APPLN. 4308/2021 and CRL.M.(BAIL) 1590/2021
                                HARMEET SINGH @ PRINCE                   ..... Petitioner
                                            Through: Mr. Prem Chhetri, Advocate

                                                   versus

                                THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI            ..... Respondent
                                             Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State
                                             with SI Meenu, PS Tilak Nagar and the prosecutrix
                                             Ms. Pallavi Sharma Kansal with Ms. Ashu
                                             Chaudhary, Advocates for Complainant/
                                             Prosecutrix

                                CORAM:
                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
                                (VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING)
                                         ORDER

% 10.01.2022

1. The present application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the applicant seeking regular bail in FIR No. 733/2021 registered under Sections 376/506/323 IPC at Police Station Tilak Nagar, Delhi.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in custody since 21.10.2021 and the charge sheet having been filed, he is no longer required for any investigation. He further submits that while the complainant/prosecutrix is a 28-year-old divorcee who was earlier married twice, the applicant is only 20 years of age. He also submits that a reading of the FIR would show that the prosecutrix earlier got married and divorced in the year 2013 and is stated to be working for a matrimonial site. It is Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SANGEETA ANAND contended that the prosecutrix is a habitual complainant, inasmuch as earlier as well an FIR was lodged by her against one Gaurav Sadana, being FIR No.1265/2015 registered under Sections 376/313/494/506 IPC at P.S. Hari Nagar, wherein similar allegations were levelled.

Learned counsel for the applicant has relied on certain screenshots of videos uploaded on YouTube, wherein the complainant has projected herself as Jassi Queen/Bigo Jassi Queen. It is also submitted that in her complaint, the prosecutrix has admitted that the relations between the parties were consensual in nature, except on 20.10.2021, when the applicant allegedly visited her place and made forceful sexual relations with her.

In respect of the said incident, learned counsel has placed reliance on the WhatsApp chats exchanged between the prosecutrix and the applicant on 20.10.2021 to submit that it was the prosecutrix who had asked the applicant to come and bring medicine for her daughter. It is further submitted that even in the WhatsApp chats exchanged on 21.10.2021, the prosecutrix only mentioned the factum of physical beating given to her and not of any forcible sexual intercourse. Lastly, it is submitted that in the complaint, the prosecutrix has deliberately introduced facts which are not borne out from the WhatsApp chats exchanged between the parties.

3. Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, learned APP for the State, duly assisted by Ms. Pallavi Sharma Kansal and Ms. Ashu Chaudhary, learned counsels for the complainant, has opposed the bail application. It is submitted that though the charge sheet has been filed, the charge is yet to be framed.

4. I have heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

5. The present FIR came to be lodged on 21.10.2021, wherein it was stated that the prosecutrix was earlier divorced in the year 2013 and came in contact with the present applicant in December, 2020. It was further stated by the prosecutrix that the relations with the applicant were consensual in nature. She also stated that while she used to receive calls on her phone from male friends, the applicant also used to receive calls on his phone from female friends. It was alleged that the applicant used to physically beat her for which she had lodged a complaint, whereafter disputes were settled between them. It was also alleged that on 20.10.2021, the applicant had visited her house and after consuming alcohol, he had committed forcible sexual intercourse upon her as well as given her beatings.

6. On a specific query, learned APP for the State, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, has stated that during investigation, the mobile phone of the applicant was seized and the WhatsApp chats relied upon by the applicant were found to have been exchanged between the respective mobiles of the prosecutrix and the applicant. On further instructions, it is submitted that it was the present complainant who had lodged FIR No.1265/2015 and that the person appearing in the aforementioned YouTube videos is the complainant. Learned counsel for the complainant, however, has disputed the same and submitted that the screenshots of the stated videos were morphed by someone else.

7. A prima facie reading of the WhatsApp chats, stated to have been exchanged between the prosecutrix and the applicant, would show that only the factum of physical beating being given to the prosecutrix has been mentioned.

8. On a prima facie view of the matter and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is directed that the applicant be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Jail Superintendent/Duty M.M./concerned Court and subject to the following further conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall not leave the NCT of Delhi without prior permission of the concerned Court.

(ii) The applicant shall remain available on mobile number:

9212823190 and 9910920836 (which belong to his father), which shall be kept operational at all times during the pendency of the trial.

(iii) In case of change of residential address or contact details, the applicant shall promptly inform the same to the concerned Investigating Officer as well as to the concerned Court.

(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear before the concerned Court during the pendency of the trial.

(v) The applicant shall not directly/indirectly try to get in touch with the complainant or any other prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence.

(vi) The applicant shall not commit an offence of similar nature during the period of his release.

9. The bail application stands disposed of in the above terms. The pending application has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly.

10. A copy of this order be communicated electronically to the concerned Jail Superintendent for information and necessary compliance.

11. A copy of this order be also uploaded on the website forthwith.

12. Needless to state that nothing observed hereinabove shall amount to an expression on the merits of the case and shall not have a bearing on the trial of the case.

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J JANUARY 10, 2022 na Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SANGEETA ANAND