Sukhram vs The State Of Delhi

Exemption allowed subject to all just exception.

Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.745/2025 dated 19.11.2025, registered at P.S. Bhalswa Dairy, for commission of offence under Section 137(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (corresponding Section 363 IPC). Subsequently, serious penal sections, including of human trafficking and sexual assault, have been added in said FIR.

The allegations are very serious and alarming.

Victim is, reportedly, 17 years of age and as per the allegations, two co-accused i.e. Usman and Chand had sexually assaulted her and sold her to the present applicant for the sum of Rs.30,000/-. The statement of victim has been recorded under Section 183 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) in which she claimed that she was, initially, brought to co-accused Chand Mohd. by his wife Tamannah. Victim claimed that she was sexually assaulted by co-accused persons and thereafter, she was brought to Uttar Pradesh and was got forcibly married to an aged man. Thereafter, she fled from there. She also claimed that the abovesaid aged man (applicant herein) had rather asked for return of money. After recording of the abovesaid statement, victim was produced before the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) and as per the directions of the CWC, victim is now with her parents.

FIR in question was lodged by her maternal uncle.

Learned Addl. P.P. for the State, on instructions, submits that the accused Chand and Usman have already been arrested and are in custody, whereas Tamannah has also been bound down. He submits that one co-accused Ravinder was arrested but he is on bail as there are no allegations of his indulging into any sexual assault. He submits that the accused persons, including the applicant, have taken undue advantage of young age of the victim and her mental condition.

The allegations against the applicant are serious and at this stage, it cannot be inferred that he had entered into any lawful marriage with victim. Keeping in mind the nature of allegations and the fact that as per prosecution it is a case of human trafficking, custodial interrogation of the applicant would be imperative.

Finding no merit or substance, the present application is, accordingly, dismissed.