SANDEEP KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant application under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking regular bail in FIR bearing no. 496/2021, registered at Police Station Vasant Kunj, Delhi for offences punishable under Ss. 354/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC') and Sec. 10/12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ("POCSO Act').

(2.) Briefly stated, the present FIR was registered on the complaint of one Ms. 'S,' aged about 12 years, in which she had alleged that one 'RS' and applicant Sandeep Kumar who resided in the same building on the third floor, used to impart tuitions to her. It was alleged that on 24/3/2021, when her mother and 'RS' had gone out to the market for shopping, the present applicant had come to her and had asked her to come to the third floor. There, he had forcefully held her hand, hugged her, and had kissed her. It is further alleged that on 1/4/2021, when the victim had come to the house of 'RS' for the purpose of tuition, in her absence, the applicant Sandeep Kumar had again committed the same acts and the victim had run away from the spot. The applicant had threatened to spoil her career in case she would divulge it to anyone. On 9/9/2021, the victim had revealed some of the incidents to her teacher, who had then called her mother and had informed her about it. Thereafter, the victim had narrated the entire incident to her mother, and based on her statement, the present case was registered.

(3.) Learned counsel for the accused/applicant states that the applicant is in judicial custody since 11/9/2021 and has no criminal antecedents. It is stated that applicant is a highly educated man and has long served the noble profession of teaching and educating children since the year 2007. It is further stated that the parents of the applicant are majorly dependent upon him as his two other brothers are married and have their respective families to look after and maintain. It is argued that the allegations levelled by the victim are completely false and baseless. It is further stated that in the present case, the FSL report does not support the prosecution story and the testimony of the victim has already been recorded. Therefore, bail be granted to the present accused/applicant.