Ajay vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi)
2019 Latest Caselaw 5981 Del

*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                         Judgment delivered on: 26.11.2019
+      BAIL APPLN. 457/2019
       Ajay                                            ..... Petitioner
                             Through:      Mr. Harsh Prabhakar, Advocate
                                           (DHCLSC) with Dhruv
                                           Chaudhary and Divyadeep
                                           Chaturvedi, Advocates.
                             versus
       STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI)                    ..... Respondent
                             Through       Mr. G. M. Farooqui,
                                           APP for State.
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI
                                    JUDGMENT

BRIJESH SETHI, J.(oral)

1. Vide this order I shall dispose of a bail application filed u/s. 439

CrPC by the petitioner Ajay in FIR No. 23/2018 u/s.

323/342/506/376/370/34 IPC, P.S. Hari Nagar.

2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for bail on the ground

that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is

submitted that present case was registered on the complaint of one

Kavita on 08.01.2018 with the help of her friend Ravi Kumar at PS

Hari Nagar against the co-accused Pintu Verma alleging that the co-

accused Pintu Verma has pushed her in the flesh trade and has also

assaulted her with a hammer type object on 07.01.2018. After

registration of FIR, the petitioner was arrested on 14.01.2018. The

police had recorded the statement of complainant Kavita on

12.01.2018 and her supplementary statement was recorded on

13.01.2018 wherein she has not taken name of the petitioner and has

also given wrong address of the place of incident.

3. It is submitted that Ld. Trial Court has failed to appreciate the

fact that there are material discrepancies in the statement of

prosecutrix/ complainant made before the police and before the Ld.

MM recorded u/s. 164 CrPC. Ld. Trial Court has failed to appreciate

the fact that the prosecutrix/ complainant has made improvement in

her supplementary statement recorded on 13.01.2018. It is, therefore,

prayed that petitioner be released on bail in the interest of justice.

5. Ld. APP for the state has opposed the bail application on the

ground that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. He

has, therefore prayed for dismissal of the bail application.

6. I have considered the rival submissions. The case was registered

on the statement of complainant 'K' who has stated that she used to

stay with her friend Pintu Verma at BF-73, 3rd Floor, Hari Nagar,

Delhi and she has earlier also stayed with Pintu Verma at different

address in Delhi. On 07.01.2018, she had an altercation with Pintu and

Pintu had beaten her and when she had tried to run away from the

house, Pintu had locked the main door of the house and beat her with

some hammer like object as a result of which she had sustained

injuries on her face, hands and knees. In her supplementary statement,

the complainant has alleged that co-accused Pintu Verma was making

sexual relations with her for the past 03-04 years without her consent.

She has further stated that two other persons namely petitioner Ajay

and Prince Bhatia also used to visit the above said address and on the

directions of Pintu Verma, they used to send her to the

clients/customers for establishing sexual relations. The complainant

has further alleged that whenever she refused to obey them, the

petitioner Ajay and co-accused Prince Bhatia used to threaten her that

Pintu Verma has her dirty photographs on his phone and he will send

the same to his family members and relatives and will also post the

same on the internet. Petitioner Ajay was arrested on 14.01.2018 and

the vehicle i.e. Car bearing registration number DL 8C M 6741 in

which the petitioner was used to be taken to the clients was seized and

taken into police custody and as per record petitioner Ajay was the

owner of the same.

7. In view of above allegations which, prima facie, reveal active

involvement of petitioner in taking the complainant to various persons

for establishing sexual relations in his car as well as extension of

threats that her objectionable photographs will be uploaded on internet

by co-accused Pintu Verma, no grounds for grant of bail to the

petitioner are made out at this stage. The bail application is, therefore,

dismissed.

BRIJESH SETHI, J NOVEMBER 26, 2019 Amit