Mr. Ravinder Singh Verma vs State
2019 Latest Caselaw 3409 Del

$~5

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                          Judgment delivered on: 24.07.2019
+     BAIL APPLN. 1148/2019
MR. RAVINDER SINGH VERMA                              ..... Petitioner
                           versus
STATE                                                 ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner :      Mr.Pramod Kr.Sharma, Adv.
For the Respondent :      Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, Addl. PP for the State
                          with SI Nirmala, P.S.Sagarpur.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                             JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No. 366/2018 under Sections 354A of the IPC read with Section 8 POCSO, Police Station Sagar Pur. Subsequently, consequent to a supplementary statement Section 10 POCSO has been added.

2. The allegation as per the FIR is that the child victim used to go for tuition classes and on the way she would cross the shop which the petitioner is alleged to be running.

3. It is alleged that on the day of the incident he called her into the shop and is alleged to have hit her hand on her chest and also touched his mouth on her chest. Thereafter, it is alleged that he touched her

private parts from over her jeans and thereafter told her not to inform anybody. Subsequently it is contended that she informed her tuition aunty as well as her mother, the following day, on which the complaint was lodged.

4. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C she has reiterated the allegations in the FIR. However, in the supplementary statement given after 10 days allegations of aggravated sexual assault have been made.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that petitioner has been in custody since 17.01.2019. He further submits that petitioner is aged 64 years and has clean antecedents. He further submits that clearly there is an improvement in the version of the prosecutrix.

6. He further submits that the chargesheet has been filed and charges have already been framed.

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

8. Accordingly, on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, petitioner shall be released on bail, if not required in any other case. Petitioner shall not do anything which may prejudice

either the trial or the prosecution witnesses. Petitioner shall not make any endeavour to contact the child victim or her family.

9. Petition is allowed in the above terms.

10. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J JULY 24, 2019/rk