Ankit Kumar v. The State NCT of Delhi

1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 197/2024 of PS Prem Nagar for offence under Section 323/328/342/354D/363/376/506/ 109/34 IPC and 6/17 POCSO Act.

2. In furtherance of last order, Status Report was filed on behalf of respondent.

3. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP GIRISH KATHPALIA KATHPALIA Date: 2025.05.28 17:11:51 +05'30' for the State as well as learned counsel for prosecutrix.

4. Broadly speaking, the prosecution case is that the prosecutrix aged about 14 years was kidnapped from Delhi by accused Vishnu and taken to Calcutta, from where she was taken to Mumbai. In Mumbai, Vishnu and the prosecutrix stayed at the house of the accused Sanjay for one week. At the house of Sanjay, one Salman and the accused/applicant were also residing. According to the statement of the prosecutrix, when Sanjay, Salman and the accused/applicant used to go out for work, accused Vishnu used to rape her daily. That happened for one week after which Vishnu took her to Calcutta but was being followed by police, so he returned to the house of accused Sanjay, who initially refused to let them stay in his house but later he permitted them to stay. Thereafter, one day the prosecutrix escaped from the house and reached a bakery, where the police arrived and she was rescued.

5. Learned counsel for accused/applicant argues that there is no allegation at all against the accused/applicant and he has been arrested without any reason. Learned counsel has taken me through statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 CrPC as well as the one recorded under Section 164 CrPC.

6. Learned prosecutor submits that in MLC, the prosecutrix alleged that apart from Vishnu, the present accused/applicant also raped her. Learned counsel for prosecutrix submits that in her statement under Section 164 KATHPALIA Date: 2025.05.28 17:11:35 +05'30' CrPC the prosecutrix clearly alleged that the accused/applicant as well as Sanjay and Salman used to close the door from outside while leaving home, which shows their complicity.

7. The reference to the accused/applicant in the alleged history recorded in MLC of the prosecutrix is worded as follows: “Vishnu made sexual relation with her followed by Sanjay, Ankit and Salman”. The reference to the accused/applicant in statement under Section 164 CrPC is worded as follows: “Room ka darwaza band karke jate the”. There is no other reference to the accused/applicant at all.

8. Rather in her statement under Section 161 CrPC, the prosecutrix named the accused/applicant Ankit with the suffix Bhaiya (brother). The statement under Section 161 CrPC is a detailed one but does not allege any incriminating act against the accused/applicant. The only reference to the accused/applicant in statement under Section 161 CrPC is that he was sharing the room with Sanjay and when all three of them used to go out for work, Vishnu used to rape her.

9. Statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 CrPC also is a detailed statement but does not even name the accused/applicant.

10. The accused/applicant is in custody since 19.06.2024.

KATHPALIA Date: 2025.05.28 17:11:22 +05'30'

11. Considering the above circumstances, I find no reason to deprive liberty to the accused/applicant any further. Therefore, the application is allowed and the accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. It is directed that the accused/applicant shall not contact the prosecutrix or any of her relatives. (JUDGE) MAY 28, 2025