Vijay v. State

$~5 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 232/2018 VIJAY ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Abhimanyu Kampani and Mr.

M.A. Karthik, Advs.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State with SI Ekta, P.S. Nangloi.

Mr. P. Kumar, Adv. for Complainant.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 02.04.2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that allegations of rape were not levelled against the petitioner in the FIR, initially registered under Sections 354/506 IPC. After 18 days of registration of FIR, statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix was got recorded wherein she has made improvements and levelled allegation that petitioner had been committing rape.

It is further submitted that prosecutrix is a grown up married woman of 32 years of age with one child. She became friendly with the petitioner, inasmuch as, had sent her nude photographs on petitioner's WhatsApp. It is further submitted that petitioner has already provided his mobile phone to the Investigating Officer.

Learned APP submits that mobile phone of the petitioner has been

scrutinized and sent to FSL. She further submits that petitioner has participated in the investigation.

Keeping in mind the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered that in case of arrest petitioner be released on bail, subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of `25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer/SHO of the concerned police station.

Application is disposed of in the above terms. Dasti.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

APRIL 02, 2018 ga