Iqbal Khan v. State (Gnct Of Delhi)

$~80 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 219/2020 IQBAL KHAN ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Pradeep Chowdhary and Mr.Vikrant Chowdhary, Advocates versus STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for State With SI Pooja, PS Darya Ganj

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA

O R D E R

% 27.01.2020 Crl M.A. No. 1758/2020 Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. Bail Appln. No. 219/2020 Vide the present petition under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail submitting to the effect that he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is further submitted that the relations between the applicant and the prosecutrix are from the year 2015 onwards and that there were no initial allegations in the FIR in relation to the allegations now sought to be added against the applicant subsequent to the applicant having been released on interim anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court vide order dated 10.12.2019 till the date 13.1.2020 when the allegations were

levelled inter alia against the petitioner for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under section 354(B)/354(C)/384/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. It has also been submitted on behalf of the applicant that there was curfew in the area where the petitioner is stated to have met the complainant and that there was no likelihood of the commission of the offence as alleged by the complainant. Reliance has also been sought to be placed on behalf of the petitioner on the chats between the applicant and the complainant in relation thereto.

On behalf of the State, the application is vehemently opposed placing reliance inter alia on the statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix and on complaints of four other complainants from the country with the allegations of similar kind as levelled against the applicant herein for having made false promises of marriage and then of having molested the women concerned and taken photographs and attempted to make their photographs viral in order to extort money.

Taking into account the totality of the circumstances of the case without any observations on the merits or demerits of the investigation or the trial that may take place, there is no ground for grant of anticipatory bail.

The Bail Appln. No.219/2020 is thus declined. ANU MALHOTRA, J JANUARY 27, 2020/SV