Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

Serious Allegations and Evasion from Investigation Lead Delhi High Court to Reject Anticipatory Bail in Rape Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Ms. Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma, has denied anticipatory bail to an accused in a case registered under Section 376 of the IPC. The case, FIR No. 485/2023, filed at Police Station Amar Colony, involves accusations of rape under the false pretext of marriage.

The Court observed, "Considering the serious allegations In the FIR, and the fact that the accused has still not joined investigation, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out” (Para 9). This strong statement came as the Court scrutinized the accused’s conduct, particularly his non-compliance with the investigation process.

The complainant alleged that she had been In a relationship with the accused since 2018, under the impression of a future marriage. However, upon becoming pregnant and seeking marriage, the accused reportedly procrastinated and later refused, leading to the registration of the FIR.

Interestingly, the accused had married the complainant after the rejection of his previous bail applications. However, the Court questioned the genuineness of this marriage, stating, “The factum of marriage and the real reason for marriage is still to be ascertained by the police/investigating agency” (Para 9).

The defense argued that the relationship was consensual and that any misunderstanding between the parties had been resolved. Nonetheless, the Court found these claims insufficient to overlook the grave nature of the allegations and the accused’s evasion from the investigation process.

Justice Sharma’s judgment emphasizes the need for the accused to partake in the investigation, especially in cases involving serious charges like rape. The denial of bail was based on the non-joining of the investigation by the accused and the recent, questionable marriage, which the Court deemed insufficient grounds for bail considering the severity of the allegations.

Date of Decision: 30.01.2024

KUSHAL KUDESIA VS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

Latest Legal News