Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

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         

 

Latest Legal News