Mere Pendency of Appeal Does Not Bar Eviction Suit – Res Judicata Not Attracted Where Issues Are Not Identical: Andhra Pradesh High Court Right to Speedy Trial is a Fundamental Right under Article 21: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail Despite Recovery of Commercial Quantity Encroachments on River Puramboke Cannot Be Legalised or Protected Under the Guise of Long President was deemed to know that the property vested with the Municipal Council, yet failed to protect it: Karnataka High Court Upholds Disqualification of Municipal President for Misconduct Once the Term of Committee Ends, Right to Vote Ceases — Even if Name Remains in Voter List: Gujarat High Court Treating Equals Unequally Violates Article 14: Bombay High Court Strikes Down IOCL's Tiebreaker rule Preferring Younger Candidate in Tender Selection Mere Harassment Over Loan Recovery Not Abetment to Suicide: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Acquittal in Vineet Kundu Case Taxpayer Cannot Be Penalized For Department's Mistake In Deposit Of GST — Allahabad High Court Directs NOIDA To Compensate The Taxpayer For Wrongful Imposition Of Tax And Penalty “When Large-Scale Fraud Vitiates Selection, En Masse Cancellation Is Inevitable: Supreme Court Validates Quashing of WBSSC 2016 Recruitment Reopening Based on Wrong Mutual Fund is No Reopening at All — Gujarat High Court Quashes Income Tax Notice for Lack of Nexus Between Allegation and Actual Transaction Exceeding Official Duty Does Not Automatically Remove Section 197 CrPC Protection: Supreme Court Quashed Proceedings Against Police Officials Possession Of A Higher Qualification Cannot Substitute The Qualification Prescribed Under  Rules: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection Of Candidate Without Required Lascar’s Licence Dismissal for Default Without Considering COVID Restrictions Was Illegal: Supreme Court Section 256 CrPC Does Not Mandate Automatic Acquittal On Complainant’s Absence — Judicial Satisfaction Is Mandatory: Supreme Court

Serious Allegations and Non-Cooperation in Investigation: High Court of Delhi Denies Bail to Accused in Sexual Assault Case Involving a Minor

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Delhi today refused to grant anticipatory bail to Khushal Singh @Gangu, the petitioner in the case filed under FIR No. 486/2023. The case involved serious charges under Sections 354/ 354A/ 354D/509 IPC and Sections 8/12 of the POCSO Act.

Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar, presiding over the matter, observed the gravity of the allegations, highlighting the petitioner's non-cooperation with the ongoing investigation. "Keeping in view the circumstances of this case and the fact that the victim was a minor at the time of the incident coupled with serious allegations against the petitioner... no benefit can be given to him at this stage," Justice Bhatnagar stated in his order.

The petition for anticipatory bail arose following allegations that the petitioner made inappropriate gestures towards a minor and physically assaulted her. The petitioner, represented by Senior Advocate Mr. K. K. Manan and his team, argued that he had been falsely implicated, citing CCTV footage and eyewitness accounts to establish his absence from the crime scene.

However, the State, represented by Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP, and Ms. Astha, Advocate for the prosecutrix, vehemently opposed the bail. They pointed out the victim's minor status at the time of the incident and her supported allegations in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C.

Justice Bhatnagar noted the presence of the victim near the place of the incident in the CCTV footage but acknowledged that the exact place of the offence was not covered by the cameras. This aspect, he mentioned, is a matter of trial and cannot be commented upon at this stage.

The court also took into consideration the petitioner's past criminal record and the fact that he had been absconding since the day of the incident. The issuance of a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) against the petitioner on December 1, 2023, was also a factor in the decision to deny bail.

This judgment underlines the court's stance on crimes involving minors and the importance of cooperation in the judicial process. Justice Bhatnagar concluded his order by stating, "Nothing stated hereinabove shall tantamount to the expression of any opinion on the merits of this case." The case continues to garner attention, emphasizing the judiciary's commitment to safeguarding minors' rights and ensuring justice.

Date of Decision: 19.01.2024

KHUSHAL SINGH @GANGU VS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI         

 

Similar News