Vikas Sharma @ Vikas Bhardwaj vs State
2020 Latest Caselaw 1436 Del

$~11
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                     Date of Decision: 03.03.2020
+       BAIL APPLN. 1484/2019
        VIKAS SHARMA @ VIKAS BHARDWAJ
                                    ..... Petitioner

                           Through:   Ms. Jhum Jhum Sarkar and
                                      Mr. Pardeep Sharma,
                                      Advocate.

                           Versus

        STATE                                      ..... Respondent

                           Through:   Mr. G.M.Farooqui,
                                      APP for State with ASI
                                      Sudesh Kumar PS:
                                      Kanjhawala.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI
                    JUDGMENT

BRIJESH SETHI, J (ORAL)

1. Vide this order, I shall dispose of a bail application filed

under section 439 Cr.P.C. read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf

of the petitioner Vikas Sharma @ Vikas Bhardwaj in FIR No.

524/2018 u/s. 498A/406/506/34, 354/377 IPC, PS Kanjhawala.

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

Bail Appl. no. 1484/2019 Page no.1 of 4 ground that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated.

Petitioner is in custody since 25.05.2019 when he surrendered

before the police. It is submitted that the Section 377 IPC is vague

and omnibus as this section was added on 25.01.2019 after Ld. ASJ

granted interim protection to the petitioner on 16.01.2019 and police

did not carry out any free and fair investigation in the matter. All

the valuables are already in custody of the complainant. It is further

submitted that the petitioner has already surrendered and had fully

co-operated with the investigating agency. It is, therefore, prayed

that petitioner be granted bail in the interest of justice.

3. The bail application is opposed by the Ld. APP for the State

on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious

in nature. Petitioner has forcefully performed unnatural sex with his

wife. He also made video of the same and threatened the

complainant to circulate it. He has, therefore prayed for dismissal of

the bail application.

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

version, on the enquiry report of CAW Cell/Rohini District,

conducted on the complaint of complainant, present FIR bearing no.

Bail Appl. no. 1484/2019 Page no.2 of 4 524/2018 u/S. 498A/406/506/34 IPC was registered at PS

Kanjhawala. During the course of investigation, statement of

complainant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was got recorded in which

she had made allegations of oral/unnatural sex against her husband

(petitioner herein) and for molestation against her father-in-law.

Complainant also alleged that her husband had made video of

oral/unnatural sex with her on his mobile and threatened her to

circulate them. Hence, Section 377 IPC/354 IPC was added in the

present case. Petitioner was arrested on 25.05.2019 and he

disclosed that he had sold his mobile, however, at his instance all

the data which was saved in a memory SD card was recovered from

his house and seized. Petitioner has not co-operated in the

investigation and has not handed over the istridhan articles as per

list to the complainant.

5. In view of the above facts appearing on record and keeping in

view the allegations levelled against the petitioner that he has

committed unnatural sexual intercourse with the complainant and

also made video of the same and threatened the complainant to

circulate it, no grounds for bail are made out. The bail application

Bail Appl. no. 1484/2019 Page no.3 of 4 is, therefore, dismissed and stands disposed of accordingly.

                                               BRIJESH SETHI, J
MARCH 3, 2020
Ak




Bail Appl. no. 1484/2019                                 Page no.4 of 4