Sanjay Sunaya vs The State (Govt. Of N.C.T Of Delhi)
2020 Latest Caselaw 1370 Del

$~7

*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                       Date of Decision: 28.02.2020

+        BAIL APPLN. 174/2020

         SANJAY SUNAYA                                ..... Petitioner

                            Through:     MR. S.K.Dayal, Advocate.
                            versus
         THE STATE(GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
                            Through:     Mr. Tarang Srivastava, Ld.
                                         APP for the State with SI
                                         Ritu Dangi: PS Kalyanpuri.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI
                               JUDGMENT

BRIJESH SETHI, J (ORAL)

1. Vide this order, I shall dispose of an anticipatory bail

application filed under section 438 Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner

Sanjay Sunaya in FIR No. 560/2019 u/s. 354/354-A/506 IPC & 8

POCSO Act, PS Kalyanpuri.

2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail

on the ground that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely

implicated. It is submitted that no incident as alleged by the

complainant was occurred on 06.12.2019 and in the audio and video

recording of the incident dated 07.12.2019, complainant herself has

admitted that no such incident has occurred on 06.12.2019 and she

has lodged a false FIR against the petitioner. It is further submitted

that petitioner has clear antecedents and is ready to join the

investigation as and when required. It is, therefore, prayed that in

the event of arrest, he be released on bail.

3. Ld. APP for the State has opposed the anticipatory bail

petition on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are

serious in nature. Petitioner is also involved in three more cases

which are as follows

Sl.no. FIR no. Under Sections

1 125/2010 323/341/427/506/34 IPC

2 452/2017 341/323/376/377/506/509/34

IPC

3 578/2017 323/354/452/506/509/34 IPC

4. In view of the above, Ld. APP, has prayed for dismissal of the

anticipatory bail application.

5. I have considered the rival submissions. As per prosecution

version, the present case FIR was registered on the complaint of

victim wherein she has alleged that on 06.12.2019, at about 4.30

pm, petitioner came at her house and pressed her chest. It is further

alleged that petitioner also threatened the victim not to tell anything

about the said incident to anyone. Statement of victim under

Section 164 Cr.P.C. was got recorded in which she has reiterated her

previous version. During the course of investigation, date of birth of

victim was found 31.01.2002. Petitioner is involved in several

criminal cases and he is evading his arrested intentionally. NBW

was got issued against him but he could not be arrested. Hence,

vide order dated 17.02.2020, proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C.

was issued against him.

6. The allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature.

Victim was minor at the time of commission of offence. The case is

at a very initial stage of investigation. The authenticity of the audio

and video recording will be considered at the appropriate stage.

Keeping in mind the fact that petitioner is previously involved in

three other criminal cases and proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C.

has been issued against him in the present case, no grounds for

anticipatory bail are made out at this stage. The anticipatory bail

application is, therefore, dismissed and stands disposed of

accordingly.

BRIJESH SETHI, J

FEBRUARY 28, 2020 Ak