RAMBIR RATHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant application under Sec. 439 read with Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.') has been filed seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 15/2023, registered at Police Station North Rohini, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Ss. 376/377/328/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC").

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that, the prosecutrix in her complaint had stated that she was having some disputes with her husband, for which she had filed cases against him, and due to the same, her husband had got her brother implicated in a false rape case i.e. FIR bearing no. 450/2022 under Ss. 376D/328/506 IPC, Police Station Civil Lines, Rampur, Uttar Pradesh. She had alleged that the present accused/applicant, who was the investigating officer in the case in which her brother was the accused, had pressurised her to withdraw her cases against her husband if she wanted that her brother should be acquitted in the said rape case. It was alleged that when she had refused to agree to the demands of the applicant, the applicant had come to her house in the last week of September and had brought tea in a Milton bottle and had forced the prosecutrix to drink the same. She had alleged that after drinking the same, she could not oppose the applicant who had removed her clothes and had raped her. It was stated that in the morning, the prosecutrix had told the applicant that she would lodge an FIR against him and upon hearing the same, the applicant had threatened to invoke Gangster Act against her brother. It is the case of prosecutrix that by issuing such threats, the applicant had raped her three times and after she had told him that she had become pregnant, the applicant had asked her to undergo abortion. It is further alleged that on 20/10/2022, the applicant had again raped her, and thereafter on 9/1/2023, he had called the prosecutrix from another WhatsApp number and had asked for her location. The prosecutrix had also stated that the applicant used to call her on a daily basis, including video calls, where he used to commit obscene acts. Thus, the present FIR was registered on 10/1/2023. Thereafter, the complainant was medically examined vide MLC No. 010/2023 dtd. 10/1/2023 wherein the complainant had reiterated her allegations and had further alleged that the accused had also committed forceful unnatural sexual assault upon her.

(3.) Learned Senior counsel for the applicant argues that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case by the prosecutrix since he is the investigating officer in the case in which prosecutrix's brother is an accused. It is submitted that seven months have passed since this Court had dismissed the bail application of the applicant and certain new facts have emerged which require consideration. It is argued by learned Senior counsel that it has come to the knowledge of the applicant that prosecutrix has lodged similar false and frivolous FIRs against several other persons in order to extort money. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that he has filed on record the transcripts of conversation pertaining to the prosecutrix wherein she can be clearly heard to be admitting that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that she will appear before the Court and will inform the Court that the applicant be granted bail. It is further stated that the matter is being adjourned by the learned Trial Court for the purpose of cross-examination of the prosecutrix as she has not been appearing before the learned Trial Court for last several dates of hearing. Therefore, it is prayed that applicant herein be enlarged on regular bail.