Sachin Kapoor v. State

$~1 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 137/2017 SACHIN KAPOOR ..... Petitioner Through :Mr.

Rajeev Garg, Mr. M. Qayam Ud-Din, Mr. Rajeev Kapoor and Ms.

Sumita Banu, Advs.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through :Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP with Inspector Raj Bala, P.S. South Rohini Mr. Sachin Sharma, Adv. for the complainant

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 13.02.2017 Complainant has alleged in the FIR that after the marriage she was harassed on the point of dowry.

Petitioner has failed to maintain normal relations. He physically abused and caused immense pain to her. Specific instances have been mentioned in the FIR. Subsequently, complainant came to know that petitioner is a bi-sexual and was maintaining physical relations with other men and women. He forcibly committed unnatural sex upon her in the night of 20th December, 2015 causing immense pain and cruelty to her. Facebook account of the petitioner indicated that he was having gay

friends. Learned APP submits that facebook account of the petitioner has been checked and the facts have been verified. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated. Petitioner has not committed unnatural sex. Complainant has already taken away her dowry articles by forcibly entering into the house of petitioner with her relatives. Complainant has also filed a divorce petition.

Keeping in mind the nature and gravity of offence, I am of the view that petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail. Bail application is dismissed.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

FEBRUARY 13, 2017 rb