Ayansh Yadav @ Shanakr v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi

$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 2362/2017 AYANSH YADAV @ SHANAKR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Davinder Kumar & Mr.Sundeshwar Lal, Advocates versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for the State with SI Anju, PS Moti Nagar

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI

O R D E R

% 07.12.2017 1.

By way of this application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the petitioner is seeking bail in case FIR No.311/2017 under Section 376/354(C)/506 IPC, PS Moti Nagar, Delhi.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 30th August, 2017 and he has been falsely implicated in this case at the instance of the husband of the complainant. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner is an unmarried young boy, aged about 19 years. He was having love affair with the complainant for about one year. On 14th August, 2017, the petitioner had also sent his family to the house of the complainant for ring ceremony but on 18th August, 2017, the complainant married another person namely Amar Srivastava and on the behest of her husband she has now falsely implicated him in this case.

BAIL APPLN. 2362/2017

4.

It has also been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not circulated any photograph of the complainant on social media and the complainant is just complaining on the instructions of her husband.

5.

On behalf of the State, bail application has been strongly opposed by Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja, learned APP for the State interalia on the ground that the photographs of the complainant have been circulated not only to the husband of the complainant but also to the friend of her husband, which fact is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6.

The statement made by the complainant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has also been annexed with the status report wherein she has stated about having physical relations with the petitioner on his promise to marry her and thereafter the petitioner has allegedly threatened her and her family to ruin them. She has also stated about her nude photos being allegedly sent by the petitioner on WhatsApp to her father. She has stated that she has already married Amar Srivastava. The petitioner is also harassing her by sending her photographs to her husband and their friends. 7.

Taking into consideration the serious nature of the allegations against the petitioner that he is allegedly harassing the complainant who has married another person and also allegedly sending her objectionable photographs to her husband and their friends, I do not find it to be a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.

8.

The bail application is dismissed.

PRATIBHA RANI, J.

DECEMBER 07, 2017/'hkaur'

BAIL APPLN. 2362/2017