Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Delhi High Court Dismisses Bail in Matrimonial Fraud Case, Stresses on Protecting Victim Identity and Upholding Justice

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, dismissed a bail application (BAIL APPLN. 4252/2023) filed by Mohit Pilania, who is implicated in a case of matrimonial fraud and conspiracy along with the main accused Aarav @ Ravi Gautam. The judgment, pronounced on January 24, 2024, underlines the gravity of the offenses, including bigamy and fraud, and emphasizes the protection of the victim’s identity.

Justice Sharma, in her observation, noted, “The allegations at this stage as elaborated in the preceding paragraphs reveal serious and grave allegations against the present accused as well as the co-accused.” This remark came in the backdrop of allegations that Aarav, through the matrimonial website Jeevansathi.com, had shown interest in 1411 women and was already married when he deceitfully married the complainant.

The court sternly addressed the issue of the complainant’s identity disclosure, a breach of Section 228A IPC, emphasizing, “This Court notes with dismay that there have been persistent attempts by the accused and his counsel to disclose the identity of the brother of the complainant, and complainant which is in the teeth of Section 228A of IPC.”

Further, the Court rejected the applicant’s counsel’s contention that the influence of the complainant’s brother, a judicial officer, impacted the case. Justice Sharma asserted, “Accepting this argument will be equivalent to accepting that a judicial officer in case of being victimized or being hurt or cheated as a family member, as in this case being the biological brother of the complainant, does not have fundamental right to get justice for himself, his family or his immediate kith and kin.”

The judgment also criticized the conduct of the applicant's counsel for repeatedly disclosing the complainant’s identity, which led to the Court’s directive to mask the names in the court records.

In conclusion, the bail application was dismissed, citing the serious nature of the accusations and the possibility of influencing the witnesses. This decision serves as a precedent in cases involving matrimonial fraud, highlighting the judiciary’s role in ensuring justice and protecting the rights and identities of victims.

Date of Decision: 24.01.2024

Mohit Pilania VS The State Govt. Of NCT of Delhi And Anr.       

 

Latest Legal News