Delhi High Court
Aman Singh @ Aman Thakur vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 22 May, 2025
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 22.05.2025
+ BAIL APPLN. 1760/2025
AMAN SINGH @ AMAN THAKUR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. R.C. Tiwari and Ms. Garima
Sachdeva, Advocates
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for the
State
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. In furtherance of last order, status report was filed.
2. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned
prosecutor assisted by the IO/SI Meetu Yadav.
3. The accused/applicant seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.
174/2025 of PS Sangam Vihar for offence under Section 376 IPC and
Section 6/21 POCSO Act. Broadly speaking, the allegation against the
accused/applicant, as unfolded through the FIR lodged by the prosecutrix is
as follows. The prosecutrix is residing with her maternal uncle while her
mother is residing separately in Gurgaon. The prosecutrix claims herself to
be minor in age and developed friendship with the accused/applicant who is
a friend of her maternal uncle. The accused/applicant assured to get married
BAIL APPLN. 1760/2025 Page 1 of 4 pages
GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2025.05.22 17:11:01 +05'30'
with the prosecutrix once she attained age of majority. Under the false
promise of getting married, the accused/applicant developed physical
relations with the prosecutrix, which led to her pregnancy. Initially, the
prosecutrix did not disclose about her pregnancy to anyone but in the month
of December, 2024, on developing stomachache when she was taken to
hospital, the doctor disclosed her pregnancy to her maternal grandmother.
When the prosecutrix spoke with the accused/applicant over phone, he
refused to get married with her and even denied his being father of the child
in her womb. Thereafter, the accused/applicant blocked her phone number.
After delivery of her child, the prosecutrix shifted to her mother in Gurgaon.
Ultimately on 17.03.2025, the prosecurix lodged a written complaint which
was registered.
4. Against the above backdrop, learned counsel for accused/applicant
contended that the accused/applicant is innocent and has been falsely
implicated in this case because the prosecutrix is an illegal immigrant from
Bangladesh and her birth certificate could not be authenticated by the
municipality. Learned counsel for accused/applicant also submitted that both
maternal uncles of prosecutrix are involved in multiple cases of forgery of
birth certificates and passports. Learned counsel for accused/applicant also
contended that there is unexplained delay in registration of the FIR, which is
in fact a counter blast to the complaint lodged against the maternal uncle of
prosecutrix by mother of the accused/applicant. Learned counsel for
accused/applicant emphatically claimed that since the accused/applicant
never had any sexual relations with the prosecutrix, he is willing to give his
blood sample for DNA analysis.
BAIL APPLN. 1760/2025 Page 2 of 4 pages
GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2025.05.22 17:10:43 +05'30'
5. On the other hand, learned APP after discussing with the IO fairly
submits that if the accused/applicant joins investigation, he can be granted
the relief of anticipatory bail in view of the circumstances of this case
mentioned above.
6. The investigator has recorded date of birth of the prosecutrix as
19.02.2010 on the basis of her birth certificate (placed at PDF 47). The said
birth certificate, on being produced before the SDMC for verification, an
endorsement was made thereon that the certificate was not issued from that
office. Another copy of same birth certificate, on being produced before the
Sub-Registrar of Birth and Death, an endorsement was made thereon that the
record is not traceable.
7. The child was born to the prosecutrix on 12.12.2024 and complaint
was lodged on 08.04.2025. There is no explanation for this delay of about 14
months after the alleged conception of child in lodging the complaint.
8. Further, the accused/applicant has also placed on record a copy of
complaint dated 17.03.2025 lodged by mother of the accused/applicant with
PS Sangam Vihar and various other authorities against maternal uncle of the
prosecutrix, as a counter blast whereof according to the learned counsel for
accused/applicant, the present FIR was got registered against him.
9. I find substance in the submissions of learned counsel for
accused/applicant that this is not an ordinary case where in view of
seriousness of the offence, the accused be denied anticipatory bail. Further,
as mentioned above, learned prosecutor also has fairly conceded.
BAIL APPLN. 1760/2025 Page 3 of 4 pages
GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
10. The application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of his
arrest, the accused/applicant shall be released forthwith on bail subject to his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the IO/SHO. It is specifically directed that
the accused/applicant shall not contact any of the prosecution witnesses
including the prosecutrix and shall join investigation as and when directed in
writing by the IO.
GIRISH Digitally signed by
GIRISH KATHPALIA
KATHPALIA Date: 2025.05.22
17:10:08 +05'30'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
MAY 22, 2025
'rs'
BAIL APPLN. 1760/2025 Page 4 of 4 pages
