Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Naveen Panchal vs The State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 24 August, 2022

Author: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

Bench: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

                          $~3
                          *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +     BAIL APPLN. 2107/2022
                                NAVEEN PANCHAL                                        ..... Petitioner
                                                    Through: Mr.Gaurav Kochar, Advocate.

                                                    Versus

                                THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)                   ..... Respondent
                                                    Through: Mr.Utkarsh, APP for State along with SI
                                                    Shivali, PS Keshavpuram.

                          CORAM:
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
                                            ORDER

% 24.08.2022

1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. This is an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.604/2022 for offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC, registered at Police Station Keshavpuram.

3. This court while issuing notice to the respondent on 26.07.2022, directed for filing of the status report with the further direction that the applicant shall cooperate with the investigation. It is also noted that the applicant was protected from arrest.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the complainant is aged about 25 years and in her complaint dated 05.07.2022, she herself had stated that on 29.05.2022, the present applicant made physical relations with her on the pretext of marriage at Hotel Prakash Continental. He submits that the instant offence is false and the applicant is Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATIMA Signing Date:29.08.2022 12:53:29 innocent therefore, the offence under Section 376 of IPC is not made out. He placed reliance on a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Pramod Suryabhan Panwar vs. State of Maharashtra1, and submitted that firstly, there was no false promise and secondly, the prosecutrix was a consenting party.

5. Learned APP for the State, while placing reliance on the status report, opposed the application and submitted that the allegations are serious and the investigation is not yet complete and therefore, the applicant should not be granted anticipatory bail, at this stage.

6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the material available on record. The facts of the case reveal that the parties are major. Prima facie it appears that the physical relations were made with the consent of the prosecurtix and whether the promise of marriage was false or it was only a misconception of facts, are the issues to be decided during the course of the trial.

7. It is seen that after passing of the order by this court, the applicant has joined the investigation and has also surrendered his mobile phone for further investigation. There is no denial of the fact that the applicant is cooperating with the further investigation of the case.

8. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to accept the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant and accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant be released on anticipatory bail, subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to 1 (2019) 9 SCC 608.

the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer/SHO of the concerned Police Station and also subject to the further following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall join the investigation as and when he is directed to do so.

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

(iii) In case of change of residential address/contact details, the applicant shall promptly inform the same to the concerned Investigating Officer/SHO.

(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear before the Trial Court as and when the charge sheet is filed against him.

9. The bail application is disposed of in the above terms.

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J AUGUST 24, 2022/MJ Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATIMA Signing Date:29.08.2022 12:53:29