MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |    

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.

Similar News