Full Text
Translation output
$-44,59&60 HIGH COURT OF DELHI , CRL.REV.P.691/2016& Crl. M.A.16669/2016
MUNEEB AHMAD ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Mamta Chandra & Mr. Prateek . Yadav,Advocates
. '
MUNEEB AHMAD ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Mamta Chandra & Mr. Prateek . Yadav,Advocates
. '
VERSUS
n STATE(GNCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
• , Through: Mr.Mukesh Kumar,APP ; with:
• , Through: Mr.Mukesh Kumar,APP ; with:
BAIL APPN.2200/2016 &Crl.M.B.1909/2016
MUNEEB AHMAD , ■.... Petitioner
Through: : Ms. Mamta Chandra & Mr. Prateek Yadav, Advocates . "
,
MUNEEB AHMAD , ■.... Petitioner
Through: : Ms. Mamta Chandra & Mr. Prateek Yadav, Advocates . "
,
VERSUS
.STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent
Through:" Mr.MukeshKiimar, APP .
,
Through:" Mr.MukeshKiimar, APP .
,
WITH
: .
BAIL APPN. 2205/2016 &Crl.M.B. 16677/2016 ' ^
TARIQUEAIJAZ@TARIKH .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Mamta Chandra & Mr. Prateek Yadav, Advocates
TARIQUEAIJAZ@TARIKH .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Mamta Chandra & Mr. Prateek Yadav, Advocates
VERSUS
' . ■ ' : , .
STATE (GNCT OFDELHI) ' .....Respondent ' Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP
2016:DHC:8729
STATE (GNCT OFDELHI) ' .....Respondent ' Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP
2016:DHC:8729
CORAM: , •
HO^'BLE MR.JUSTICE A^K.PAXjaAK. ORDER 26.10.2016 eousin ofTarique.The prosecutrix/complairiantis also related to Tarique;'the sister n :It^is noted thatj ori the eomplairit of prpsecutrix/cohiplainaht
, No:i97/2016i under Section 376IPCjregistered on 27'^ August,2016 atPS:
Chandni Mahal.; The FIR was registered 0n6'day after the mairiage of {
Muneeb. The prpsecutrijO'complainant alleged in the FIR that,, Muneeb^ developed friendly felatiohs with her and promised to marry her. He told ' her that he had already spbkeh to his family iri this regard. By extending a .
.promise to marry/her,;hq develppeA physical relations with-her on several.
'
- . occasions. On 26'^ August, 2016, proseCutrix narrated all the facts tp her parents arid,thereafter;they wentto Muneeb's house to talk with his family;
, . members about the wrfejf/r. However,they declined to marry Muneeb with
■her, iriasmuch informed that iMimeeb had performed with his cousin, : SariyaFaran, the same day ^ v
Iri the said case, the petitioner Muneeb was granted anticipatory bail by the learried Additional Sessions Judge on 1®^ September,;20161However, the anticipatory;bail of the,petitioner has'been cancelled by the.learned , AdditipnahSessionsJudge yide order dated 17, October,2016passed iii bail
, application Nbs.75228/20i6,in view ofthe registration of Subsequent FIR n
NQjd8/2016,.under Sections 3^ IPC, registered-atj-
PS:Janla Masjid, Delhi ph 17 September, 2016, on the complaiiit of . pfosecutrix.Inthis.FIR,the,prosecutrix:has alleged lhat ph 17^ September, 2016'she was returhing frphi hef aunt's:hpuse at about 5::30'pm iarid;.when she'reached near;Balak -Mata Centre; two boys, caught hold of her heck
':n the rape case. When she refused,to withdraw the cas.e,;]^^
; bydier throat and slapped-her iahd also tpuched her chest. She rto away but ^
Murteeb and Tarique Panie after,her. They were carrying plastic thumbs.up v
. bottles. Muneeb opened the bpttle,and,ppured, t^^^ ph.her,;which: smelled like kerbsehepp.Thereafter,Muheebpnd Tarique ran away. ; , \
. ; submits that the pietitiphers have ^ been Talsely implicated,;with a vie^ to,get the ariticipatoiy .bail ot the, , ;petitipner, Muneebjcancelled. No act has been assigned to.Tarique except V. that he was present with Muneeb. J^urieeb was in his office till5:15.phi, .; senior officers,of the bank. Muneeb had suffered injuty in his-ieft hand, which was plastered on 16*^ September,2016.Thus,Muneeb could nothave caught hold of the neck of the prosecutrij^cbmplainant -and slapped her
, simultaneously,as has been alleged by her.The medical prescriptions have' also been placed on record. ' v . '
It is fiirther. subimtted">^;t^^^^ the prosecutrix and her family turned inimical towards the petitioners and their family since they had refusedJto i. Therefore,V \
5,who iiaVe tb ' approach this Court by wa:y of two writ petitions, that is, WP(Crl.) Nos
2649/2016 mid 262i5/20i6bh"7* September,2016,much prioitothelodging , ofthe second FIR; Only,theredftei*, as a counterblast, the present FIR has- v been lodged. : n
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances;as npted aboVe, it is . brderedi that,petitioners Muneeb and Tarique, in case of their aire be n
, released:on bail,;subj'ec^:to iheir Rirnishm^^ bonds in the sum of
\Rs.50,000/- each,\yith oiie surety bfthe like amount,to the satisfaction oT ninthe.FIR No.108/2016,PS:Jamh Masjid,Delhi; I \
>:•: nn i
The order impugned in the criminal revision petition dated 17^^
October,2016 is also set aside. The anticipatory bail granted by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge in FIR No.197/2016 under Section 376 IPG, registered atPS:Chandni Mahal,is restored.
All the three petitions are,disposed ofin the above temis. Dasti. All the pending,applications are also disposed of. a.k:pathak,j
OCTOBER 26,2016 V
, No:i97/2016i under Section 376IPCjregistered on 27'^ August,2016 atPS:
Chandni Mahal.; The FIR was registered 0n6'day after the mairiage of {
Muneeb. The prpsecutrijO'complainant alleged in the FIR that,, Muneeb^ developed friendly felatiohs with her and promised to marry her. He told ' her that he had already spbkeh to his family iri this regard. By extending a .
.promise to marry/her,;hq develppeA physical relations with-her on several.
'
- . occasions. On 26'^ August, 2016, proseCutrix narrated all the facts tp her parents arid,thereafter;they wentto Muneeb's house to talk with his family;
, . members about the wrfejf/r. However,they declined to marry Muneeb with
■her, iriasmuch informed that iMimeeb had performed with his cousin, : SariyaFaran, the same day ^ v
Iri the said case, the petitioner Muneeb was granted anticipatory bail by the learried Additional Sessions Judge on 1®^ September,;20161However, the anticipatory;bail of the,petitioner has'been cancelled by the.learned , AdditipnahSessionsJudge yide order dated 17, October,2016passed iii bail
, application Nbs.75228/20i6,in view ofthe registration of Subsequent FIR n
NQjd8/2016,.under Sections 3^ IPC, registered-atj-
PS:Janla Masjid, Delhi ph 17 September, 2016, on the complaiiit of . pfosecutrix.Inthis.FIR,the,prosecutrix:has alleged lhat ph 17^ September, 2016'she was returhing frphi hef aunt's:hpuse at about 5::30'pm iarid;.when she'reached near;Balak -Mata Centre; two boys, caught hold of her heck
':n the rape case. When she refused,to withdraw the cas.e,;]^^
; bydier throat and slapped-her iahd also tpuched her chest. She rto away but ^
Murteeb and Tarique Panie after,her. They were carrying plastic thumbs.up v
. bottles. Muneeb opened the bpttle,and,ppured, t^^^ ph.her,;which: smelled like kerbsehepp.Thereafter,Muheebpnd Tarique ran away. ; , \
. ; submits that the pietitiphers have ^ been Talsely implicated,;with a vie^ to,get the ariticipatoiy .bail ot the, , ;petitipner, Muneebjcancelled. No act has been assigned to.Tarique except V. that he was present with Muneeb. J^urieeb was in his office till5:15.phi, .; senior officers,of the bank. Muneeb had suffered injuty in his-ieft hand, which was plastered on 16*^ September,2016.Thus,Muneeb could nothave caught hold of the neck of the prosecutrij^cbmplainant -and slapped her
, simultaneously,as has been alleged by her.The medical prescriptions have' also been placed on record. ' v . '
It is fiirther. subimtted">^;t^^^^ the prosecutrix and her family turned inimical towards the petitioners and their family since they had refusedJto i. Therefore,V \
5,who iiaVe tb ' approach this Court by wa:y of two writ petitions, that is, WP(Crl.) Nos
2649/2016 mid 262i5/20i6bh"7* September,2016,much prioitothelodging , ofthe second FIR; Only,theredftei*, as a counterblast, the present FIR has- v been lodged. : n
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances;as npted aboVe, it is . brderedi that,petitioners Muneeb and Tarique, in case of their aire be n
, released:on bail,;subj'ec^:to iheir Rirnishm^^ bonds in the sum of
\Rs.50,000/- each,\yith oiie surety bfthe like amount,to the satisfaction oT ninthe.FIR No.108/2016,PS:Jamh Masjid,Delhi; I \
>:•: nn i
The order impugned in the criminal revision petition dated 17^^
October,2016 is also set aside. The anticipatory bail granted by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge in FIR No.197/2016 under Section 376 IPG, registered atPS:Chandni Mahal,is restored.
All the three petitions are,disposed ofin the above temis. Dasti. All the pending,applications are also disposed of. a.k:pathak,j
OCTOBER 26,2016 V
JUDGMENT