In an application filed before the Delhi High Court seeking regular bail concerning a First Information Report (FIR) registered for the commission of offences under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 6 of the Protection of Children Against Sexual Offences Act, 2012, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia denied bail to the applicant despite a no-objection by the prosecutrix.
The applicant, a 42-year-old man and the father of six children, had forcibly raped the prosecutrix, a minor. The applicant submitted that he was innocent and that he was arrested 21 days after the said FIR was registered. It was asserted that the police did not seek his custody and that he had been in jail for the past 300 days, even though the prosecutrix had no objection if bail was granted to him. The IO submitted that the arrest was delayed because the applicant was untraceable.
Regarding the delayed arrest, the Court said that it was not the case of an unknown aggressor who had to be found since the applicant was named by the prosecutrix in the FIR itself. However, it was also said that, merely because of an approximate 20-day delay, the prosecution’s case could not be discarded.
The Court noted that the prosecutrix supported the prosecution’s case and that her mother and brother had yet to be examined. It was also noted that she had become pregnant on account of her rape. Considering the overall circumstances as well as the socio-economic conditions of the parties, the Court stated that the no-objection given by the prosecutrix regarding the applicant’s bail could not be considered as a relevant factor, especially since her mother and her brother were yet to be examined.
Thus, the Court refused to release the applicant on bail and dismissed the application.
Appearances:
For Petitioner – Mr. Harjas Pratap Singh Anand, Mr. Utsav Shrivastava
For Respondents – Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal (APP)
