SUNAYNA GROVER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS common order shall dispose of the aforesaid three bail applications filed on behalf of Sunyana Grover D/o Sunil Dutt Grover, Chunkey grover S/o Sunil Dutt Grover, Raina Grover w/o Sunny Narchal and D/o Sunil Dutt grover who all are undergoing trial in a case arising out of FIR No. 489/2006 under section 5 of ITP Act, read with Sections 376,120b, 34 IPC registered at police Station West Patel Nagar, New Delhi and are all in judicial custody since 17. 7. 2008.

(2.) ACCORDING to the counsel for the applicants, the applicants are entitled to bail inasmuch as, the complainant /chitra has lodged the present fir as a counterblast to the case pending before the CAW Cell filed by Raina, the sister of the applicants -Sunayna and Chunky on 17. 8. 2006 against her husband Sunny, Father in law Surendra and the complainant/chitra. It is their case that all the family members have been falsely implicated by the complainant so as to save her family members. It is submitted that story projected has been tested by the IO in his interim report and nothing has come out. Moreover the complainant failed to identify the Sardar (who is alleged to be a customer in the alleged prostitution business) and other customers in her FIR. It is also submitted that even the charge sheet submitted by the police did not reveal any finding, evidence or any other material against the applicants which can implicate them in the aforesaid matter. The filing of FIR after 9 months of the alleged incident leaves a big question of doubt inasmuch as she had not explained the reason for such delay. It is further submitted that the applicants are having no criminal background whatsoever and are of young age and are permanent resident of Delhi and no more required for any investigation. It is thus submitted that the applicants, having clean antecedents are entitled to be released on bail.

(3.) REGARDING the applicant, Sunayna Grover, who is related to Raina as her elder sister, it is also stated that she was hardly 21 years of age at the time of the alleged incident and has no criminal antecedent whatsoever. It is further submitted that applicant moved the anticipatory bail application when she was under protection from arrest vide order dated 11. 09. 2006. Thereafter when she was arrested from her house she moved a bail application which was rejected by the Ld. ASJ vide order dated 26. 7. 2008, feeling aggrieved by the said order applicant approached this court on 12. 1. 2009 whereby she was directed to move the bail application before the Sessions court which has been dismissed vide order dated 27. 01. 2009 whereby it was held that the applicant/sunayna in conspiracy with other co-accused persons forced the complainant for prostitution by threatening her. It is also submitted that other accused who allegedly committed rape on the body of the complainant have already been granted bail by the Sessions Court namely Harish Sachdeva, Sunil Gulati and Rajesh Jaggi. It is also submitted that there is no evidence against them which connects the applicants with crime.