Sonu @ Yad Ram v. The State (NCT Of Delhi)

$~5 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 52/2018 SONU @ YAD RAM ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.

Amit Sinha and Ms.

Kirty Aggarwal, Advs.

versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through:

Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for State with SI Arun Kumar, P.S. Bhajan Pura.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 10.04.2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prosecutrix was aged about 20 years at the time of incident. She was studying in BSc IInd Year. There is delay of about 3 months in filing the FIR. Prosecutrix has alleged that petitioner had forcibly raped her on 26th April, 2017 and 2nd May, 2017, however, neither she lodged any complaint nor disclosed about the alleged rape to anyone. She has lodged the FIR only on 16th July, 2017. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has taken a different stand Learned APP opposes the grant of bail on the ground that allegations are serious in nature.

In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., prosecutrix has stated that petitioner had promised to marry the prosecutrix. Prosecutrix has even delivered a child.

Investigations are complete and charge sheet has been filed. Petitioner is in custody for the last about 10 months. Keeping in mind the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, petitioner is admitted to bail, subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of `10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. Bail application is disposed of in the above terms. Dasti.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

APRIL 10, 2018 ga