Vinay Pratap Singh v. State Of Delhi
$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + VINAY PRATAP SINGH .... Petitioner Represented by:
Mr.Randhir Lal with Ms.Amrita Chatterjee, Advocates versus STATE OF DELHI ... Respondent Represented by:
Mr.Ashok Kumar Garg, APP for the State Mr.Rajesh Kumar Singh with Mr.Sagar Roy, Advocates for the complainants
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 01.11.2018 1.
By this petition the petitioner seeks bail in FIR No.1/2018 under Sections 376/306/506/511 IPC registered at PS Hauz Khas. 2.
The allegations of the complainant in the FIR in question are that in the month of September, 2017 she got registered herself at shaadi.com for marriage. On 24th November, 2017 the petitioner Vinay Pratap Singh sent a request for marriage at shaadi.com. The complainant checked the profile of Vinay Pratap Singh and accepted the request. She came to know from chatting that the petitioner was a resident of Jaipur where his parents and
younger sister were residing. According to the information available, petitioner was working in USA. The complainant came to know that the petitioner was visiting India on 14th December, 2017 for attending the marriage of his sister when he would meet the complainant also. On 23rd December, 2017, petitioner told the prosecutrix that they should spend 3-4 days with each other, during which time he will confirm about the marriage. The petitioner booked the air tickets for Port Blair and a hotel. Though initially the prosecutrix was not ready but when the petitioner took the plea that they will be marrying, she agreed to it. The petitioner came to the house of the prosecutrix and stated that he wanted to celebrate the occasion and they should go for a party to Hauz Khas Village.
They drank a lot and the petitioner made forcible relationship with the prosecutrix on the allurement of marriage at her home. The prosecutrix thereafter accompanied the petitioner to Port Blair where also they had physical relationship. The petitioner stated to her that after reaching Jaipur he would confirm about the marriage but he did not call her back and blocked her WhatsApp chat. 3.
Petitioner has placed on record copy of FIR No.691/2016 under Section 376/323/506 IPC registered at PS Kalkaji against one Saurabh Rawat by the prosecutrix and also a complaint against one Rajat Seth in a similar manner and thus claims that the prosecutrix has filed a false FIR. 4.
By that as it may, the fact that even after the petitioner allegedly forcibly sexually raped the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage at her home in Delhi, she agreed to join him at Port Blair and the petitioner was to confirm about the marriage at Port Blair also the fact that the petitioner has been in custody for nearly 10 months this Court deems it fit to grant bail to
the petitioner.
5.
It is, therefore, directed that in the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of ₹50,000/- with one surety to the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, further subject to the condition that the petitioner will not leave the country without prior permission of the learned Trial Court and in case of change of address the petitioner will intimate the same to the Learned Trial Court by way of affidavit.
6.
Petition is disposed of.
7.
Order dasti.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
NOVEMBER 01, 2018 'rk'