BAIL APPLN./52/2018 of SONU @ YAD RAM Vs THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+BAIL APPLN. 52/2018SONU @ YAD RAM..... PetitionerThrough:Mr.AmitSinhaandMs.KirtyAggarwal, Advs.SONU @ YAD RAM..... PetitionerThrough:Mr.AmitSinhaandMs.KirtyAggarwal, Advs.

versus

THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)..... Respondent

Through:Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for Statewith SI Arun Kumar, P.S. BhajanPura.with SI Arun Kumar, P.S. BhajanPura.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAKO R R%10.04.2018

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prosecutrix was agedabout 20 years at the time of incident. She was studying in BSc IInd Year.There is delay of about 3 months in filing the FIR. Prosecutrix has allegedthat petitioner had forcibly raped her on 26[th]April, 2017 and 2[nd]May, 2017,however, neither she lodged any complaint nor disclosed about the allegedrape to anyone. She has lodged the FIR only on 16[th]July, 2017.In herstatement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has taken different stand

Learned APP opposes the grant of bail on the ground that allegationsare serious in nature.In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.,prosecutrix has stated that petitioner had promised to marry the prosecutrix.Prosecutrix has even delivered child.

Investigations are complete and charge sheet has been filed.Petitioner is in custody for the last about 10 months. Keeping in mind thetotality of the facts and circumstances of this case, petitioner is admitted to

bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `10,000/- withone surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Bail application is disposed of in the above terms.

Dasti.

APRIL 10, 2018ga

A.K. PATHAK, J.