Jogender Kumar vs State
2019 Latest Caselaw 381 Del

$~9

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                  Judgment delivered on: 21.01.2019

+      BAIL APPLN. 2364/2018
JOGENDER KUMAR                                         ..... Petitioner
                          versus

STATE                                                  ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner :      Mr. Umesh Kumar and Ms.Ranjana Chauhan, Advs.

For the Respondent :      Mr.Hirein Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with SI
                          Sudeep Kumar, P.S.Bindapur.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                             JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.0769/2018, under Section 12 POCSO & 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Bindapur.

2. The allegations against the petitioner made by the prosecutrix in the FIR are that the petitioner had caught the wrist of the prosecutrix and was inquiring about the address of her co-student and when she declined to divulge the address, he is alleged to have caught hold of her neck and thereafter threatened her. She thereafter ran away from the spot.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the bare reading of the FIR, no offence under 'The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act' (POCSO) is made out and there is no sexual assault. Further it is contended that the subject FIR has been lodged to implicate the petitioner as there is dispute between the petitioner and the father of the prosecutrix and the petitioner was earlier also falsely implicated.

4. Petitioner was granted interim protection on 08.10.2018 subject to joining investigation.

5. Learned APP informs that petitioner had joined investigation. Investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed. He further submits that keeping in view the facts as emerged during investigation, no offences under Section 12 POCSO was established and charge sheet has been filed under Section 354D and 506 IPC.

6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view of the totality of the facts and circumstances, I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the arresting officer/IO/SHO shall release the petitioner on bail on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Investigating Officer/SHO concerned. Petitioner shall not do

anything that may prejudice either the trial or the prosecution witnesses. Petitioner shall not contact the prosecutrix or her family members.

8. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J JANUARY 21, 2019/rk