Chetna v. State

$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 1724/2016 CHETNA ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Ms. Anindita Pujari, Mr.

Santosh Kumar, Advs.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by:

Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with PSI Puja Saini PS Punjabi Bagh.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 07.11.2016 By the present petition the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.500/2016 under Sections 376/506/109/120B/34 IPC registered at PS Punjabi Bagh.

The allegations against the petitioner by the complainant who is a cousin of the petitioner are that when she visited her maternal uncle's house on 28th June, 2015 she found her maternal uncle and daughter of another maternal uncle in an objectionable position. Seeing this, both of them dragged her inside and her uncle raped her. In August, 2015 the petitioner took her to an unknown hotel where some persons were already present who raped her and the petitioner took her video. Subsequent sexual assaults have also been narrated in the FIR.

BAIL APPLN. 1724/2016

This Court issued notice in the present petition on 23rd August, 2016 and granted interim protection subject to the petitioner joining the investigation as and when directed by the investigating officer. A perusal of the status report reveals that the petitioner joined the investigation on 29th August, 2016 when she was asked to provide details of her friend such as address, contact number and all other informations which she did not provide despite notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C. being served on her. After 29th August, 2016 the petitioner also did not even join investigation. Considering the conduct adopted by the petitioner I find no reason to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Petition is dismissed.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

NOVEMBER 07, 2016 'ga'

BAIL APPLN. 1724/2016