HARPAL SHARMA Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail under Sec. 439 read with Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. in FIR No. 222/2019 under Sec. 354(C)/376IPC and Sec. 6 POCSO Act registered at PS Hari Nagar.

(2.) In brief as per the case of the prosecution, the case was registered on the statement of Ms. "M" (prosecutrix) who alleged that in December 2018, she came in contact with petitioner, who was residing in her neighbourhood and they exchanged their mobile numbers and started talking over phone. In the first week of December 2018, the petitioner asked her to go for movie, for which she agreed but instead of taking her for movie, he took her to OYO hotel which was located on upper floor of Kwality Sweets, Clock Tower, Hari Nagar, New Delhi wherein the petitioner made forcible physical relations with her. Thereafter, he used to take prosecutrix to OYO hotel room, Hari Nagar wherein he used to make physical relations without her consent. Further, the petitioner in OYO Hotel room captured naked photographs which were sent on the phone of Raj Kumar, who is known to her father and the same was revealed by Raj Kumar to her father resulting in a quarrel. Thereupon the aforesaid case registered and investigation taken up.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner in her facebook profile had claimed her date of birth as 9/8/1995 while, as per the case of the prosecution the age of the prosecutrix is claimed to be 9/8/2001. It is further urged that even as per the case of the prosecution, the age of prosecutrix, on the first date of establishment of sexual relations (i.e. 3/12/2018) was about 17 years and 4 months. It is further contended that the statement of the prosecutrix has already been recorded before the Trial Court and petitioner is no longer required. Several inconsistencies in the statement of prosecutrix are further relied upon.