Jatin Sethi vs State (NCT Of Delhi)

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

Crl. M.A. No.34174/2018

By this application, the petitioner seeks amendment of the prayer clause to incorporate Section 328 IPC.

Learned counsel submits that initially the FIR was registered only under Section 354A/354D/506 IPC and Section 8 POCSO Act. Subsequently

during investigation in these proceedings, it was informed that Section 328 IPC has been added. Â

For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed. Reference in the Prayer paragraph to the FIR shall read as “under Section

354A/354D/506/328 IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act.â€​

Application is allowed in the above terms Bail Application No.1995/2018

Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.380/2018 registered under Sections 354A/354D/506/328 IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act, Police Station

Ghazipur.

The allegations against the petitioner are that the petitioner was known to the prosecutrix for over two years having been introduced through a

common friend. It is alleged that the petitioner initially instigated and threatened her to start smoking and consume alcohol. It is contended that

the petitioner used to threaten her that in case she would not smoke or take alcohol, he would cause harm to her as well as to her brother.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that there is material inter alia social media

conversations between the parties where the petitioner has been telling the prosecutrix not to consume alcohol etc., as the same is harmful to her.Â

He submits that he has been falsely implicated as there was constant demand for money from the petitioner. It is informed that the petitioner is of a

tender age of 21 years.

Learned APP for the State informs that investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed. He submits that the only material against the

petitioner is the statement of the prosecutrix and her mother. On inquiry, he has informed that during investigation no independent witness has stated

anything incriminating against the petitioner.Â

The petitioner has been in custody since 13.08.2018.

Without commenting on the merits of the case and on perusal of the record, I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of

regular bail. Accordingly, on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial

court, the petitioner shall be released on bail, if not required in any other case. The petitioner shall not do anything, which may prejudice either the trial

or the prosecution witnesses.

Petitioner shall not contact the prosecutrix or her family.Â

The bail application is disposed of in the above terms.Â

Order dasti under the signatures of the Court Master. Â