Delhi High Court
Vishal Vasisht vs State on 3 January, 2018
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Order reserved on : 13th December, 2017
Order pronounced on :03rd January, 2018
+ BAIL APPLN. 2339/2017
VISHAL VASHISHT ....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Amit Sharma, Mr. Aditya
Bhardwaj and Mr. Kunal Sharma,
Advocates.
Versus
STATE .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the
State with Inspector Jai Prakash
from ASC/West.
Mr. Anupam S. Sharma, Mr.
Pankaj Gupta, Mr. Prakash Airan
and Ms. Prachee Satija, Advocates
for Complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
1. By way of the present petition filed under Section 438 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as 'Cr.P.C.'), the
petitioner seeks grant of Anticipatory Bail in FIR No. 0495/2017
under Sections 384/389/34/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
(hereinafter referred as 'IPC') registered at Police Station-Punjabi
Bagh, New Delhi.
2. Brief facts of the present case are that, a complaint was lodged on
16.09.2017 by one Basudev Aggarwal alleging therein that from
the past 13 years some devious and crafty persons, engaged in
unlawful acts, have been trying to threaten him and commit
BAIL APPLN. 2339/2017 Page 1 of 5
extortion by blackmailing him to bring in public domain some
false, fake, doctored and morphed photographs and videos of him
which show him in compromising positions with certain woman
but neither had he met such woman nor have any relation with her.
The complainant further alleged that the persons namely Harish
Tiwari, Subhash Sharma and Ashok Kumar Sagar alongwith their
other co-companions have been threatening and blackmailing the
complainant only to extort money from him and to lower down his
reputation, image and credibility in the society. In his
supplementary statement dated 07.10.2017, the complainant has
also named the present petitioner/ Vishal @ Vinay Vashisht and his
brother Bawa Vashisht as persons involved with other co-accused
in extorting money from him.
3. On 07.10.2017 the petitioner/ Vishal @ Vinay Vashishth, was
arrested red handed by the police team while he was receiving
Rs. 1 Lakh as extortion money. The petitioner disclosed that he is a
member of the blackmailer/extortion gang along with his brother
Bawa Vashisht, Harish Tiwari, Ashok Sagar, Subhash Sharma and
others. When he took the police to his house for recovery, his
family members i.e. his wife, mother and sister-in-law assaulted
the police team and he managed to escape the police custody.
Consequently, FIR bearing No. 431/2017 was registered at the
instance of SI Shashi Kant against the petitioner and his wife.
4. The application filed by the petitioner before the Additional
Sessions Judge for seeking anticipatory bail was dismissed vide
order dated 02.11.2017. Hence the present petition.
BAIL APPLN. 2339/2017 Page 2 of 5
5. Mr. Amit Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended
that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case
and has no connection whatsoever with the complainant or the
other co-accused persons; that the petitioner has neither been
named in the FIR nor is there any evidence on record to show that
he was in touch with the co-accused persons at any time before the
said complaint was lodged; that the extortion money was not
received, taken or demanded by the petitioner and the same is
evident from the F.I.R. wherein no such allegations have been
made against the petitioner; that the petitioner has been joining
investigation as directed by this Court and undertakes to do so in
future whenever he shall be required for the same; that hence in the
aforementioned circumstances anticipatory bail be granted to the
petitioner.
6. Per Contra, Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the state vehemently
opposed the bail application of the petitioner and submitted that the
petitioner was caught red handed while receiving Rs.1 Lakh as
extortion money; that the petitioner had previously managed to
escape police custody with the help of his family members; that the
petitioner has been previously involved in another case bearing FIR
No.150/10 registered under Section 295A IPC and investigation in
respect of FIR No.431/17 registered against him is also pending;
that the petitioner has not been cooperating in the investigation of
the present case and his custodial interrogation is required to
unearth the true facts behind the commission of the alleged
BAIL APPLN. 2339/2017 Page 3 of 5
offence; that hence in the said circumstances his petition for grant
of anticipatory bail be dismissed.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
8. In the present case, the complainant in his complaint followed by
his supplementary statement dated 07.10.2017 has alleged that a
group of persons including the present petitioner have been
extorting money from him by blackmailing him that they would
bring in the public domain some false, fake, doctored and morphed
photographs and videos of him which show him in compromising
positions with certain woman.
9. As per records, on 07.10.2017, a trap was laid down by the
complainant with the help of the police officials in order to catch
hold of the accused persons who were to receive an amount of
Rs.1Lakh on that day from the complainant. Consequently the
petitioner was caught in the said trap and was arrested red handed
by the police officials, while he was receiving the extortion money.
However, when the police officials took the petitioner to his house
for recovery, the family members of the petitioner attacked the
police officials and helped the petitioner to escape custody. Hence
another FIR bearing No. 431/2017 was registered against the
petitioner/Vishal Vashisht and his wife/Renu Vashisht.
10. As per the Status Report dated 17.11.2017 and the additional Status
Report filed subsequently on behalf of the State, the Mobile Phone
used in the act of crime, the doctored photographs and videos, the
money extorted so far is yet to be recovered. The petitioner has
BAIL APPLN. 2339/2017 Page 4 of 5
also been found to be involved in another case F.I.R. bearing No.
150/2010 registered under Section 295A IPC. Besides this, it is
also revealed that the petitioner has not been cooperating in the
investigation and has not been providing relevant information
sought by the Investigating Officer and is misleading the
investigation of the present case.
11. Keeping in view the fact that investigation in the present case is
still in its embryonic stage; there are chances of petitioner escaping
the process of law, tampering with the evidence or threatening the
complainant and witnesses; recoveries are yet to be effected for
which custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required, this
Court does not deem it as a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.
12. Accordingly, the petition for Anticipatory Bail stands dismissed.
13. Before parting with above order, it is made clear that anything
observed in the present petition shall not have any bearing on the
merits of the case during trial.
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.
JANUARY 3, 2018
/gr//
