Final Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Page 1 of 4
Bail Application No. 714/2023
STATE Vs. RITESH SANGWAN
FIR No. 216/2023
PS Vasant Kunj (S)
U/sec. 376 IPC
25.04.2023
Present: Sh. R K Bhati, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Ms. Manju Sehrawat, Ld. Counsel for accused/applicant.
Complainant in person alongwith Ld. Counsels Sh.
Tavrej Ahmed and Sh. Anil Tomar.
Ms. Priya Singh, Ld. Counsel from DCW.
IO SI Amolak in person.
This is an application for grant of bail under Section 439
Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of accused Ritesh Sangwan.
Reply filed by the IO.
Arguments heard and record perused.
The factual matrix in brief is that, the accused and the
prosecutrix were engaged in a family function and the date of
marriage was fixed for 22.04.2023. It is alleged that on the intervening
night of 04/05.02.2023, the accused and the prosecutrix came from a
party and after about midnight, the accused dropped the prosecutrix at
her house and accompanied her to her bedroom, where she was
subjected to forcible sexual intercourse by the accused. It is further
alleged that the accused had established forcible sexual relation with
the prosecutrix while they were on pre wedding shoot at Rishikesh. It
is the case of the prosecution that around fifteen days before the date
of marriage, the accused’s family demanded a sum of Rs. 25 lacs and
Fortuner car as dowry, failing which they had broken the marriage.
-- 1 of 4 --
Page 2 of 4
It is submitted on behalf of applicant/accused that the
accused and the prosecutrix got engaged and the marriage was fixed
with the consent of the family for 22.04.2023. It is further submitted
that the accused has been falsely implicated in this this case as the
marriage could not be solemnised due to temperamental
incompatibility between the parties. It is further submitted that the
whatsapp chats between the accused and the prosecutrix clearly
suggests that there were highly temperamental issues between both
the accused and the prosecutrix and that is why the marriage was
broken.
It is argued on behalf of the prosecution assisted by the
Ld. Counsel for the prosecutrix that there are specific allegations of
forcible sexual intercourse by the accused on 04.02.2023 and during
the period from 25.04.2023 to 27.04.2023.
It is argued by Ld. Counsel for prosecutrix/complainant
that application moved by the accused is a successive bail application
as the previous bail application was dismissed and there is not change
of circumstances. It is to note that earlier application moved on behalf
of applicant/accused was dismissed not on merit rather it was
withdrawn with the permission of the court.
The defence has strongly relied upon the whatsapp chats
and placed on record around 113 pages of chats. On perusal of the
same, it is apparent that there were some dispute between the accused
and the prosecutrix from the very beginning and there were some
temperamental issues between both of them. With the passage of time,
these small temperamental issues kept on aggravating and at one point
-- 2 of 4 --
Page 3 of 4
of time, the relation reached to a stage where prosecutrix had said
“tameez se baat karo kutta nahi hoon main”.
Ld. Counsel for the applicant/accused relied upon the
location of the mobile phone of the prosecutrix and the accused on the
date of incident of 04.02.2023, which corresponds with the story of
the prosecution and the same aspect is the part of the reply filed by the
IO. As per the location chart of the mobile phones, the location of the
mobile phone of the accused and the prosecutrix is at the residence of
the prosecutrix at about 12:32 am and the location of the mobile
phone of the accused at his house is 12:49 am. The distance between
the house of the prosecutrix and the accused is stated to be about 3
kms. On the basis of the location chart, it is argued that it is not
possible to commit forcible sexual relations at the house of the
prosecutrix and then returned back to his house with a short span of
time of 17 minutes.
Further, the accused and the prosecutrix went for the pre
wedding shoot at Rishikesh accompanied with the cousin sister of the
prosecutrix. The statement of the cousin sister of the prosecutrix is
recorded by the IO. As per the statement of her cousin sister, they
shared one room and after dinner, the accused slept on the couch
while she alongwith the prosecutrix slept on the bed. Moreover, in the
lengthly conversation between the accused and the prosecutrix, no
such complaint/reference of the said incident appeared in the chats.
The accused has been in custody since 05.04.2023 and
the mobile phone of the accused which was in use on the date of
incident has already been seized and during the course of arguments,
-- 3 of 4 --
Page 4 of 4
the IO submits that no obscene video or photograph of the prosecutrix
was found in the mobile phone of the accused. The investigation qua
the accused is almost complete. On the face of it, it appears to be
courtship relation turned sour kind of dispute. Further, there are
allegation of forcible sexual intercourse which are the subject matter
of trial.
Considering the facts and submissions and the fact that
the trial will take long time and that accused/applicant is having no
criminal record, he is admitted to bail on his furnishing bail
bond/personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the
like amount subject to satisfaction of Ld. MM/Duty MM. The bail is
granted subject to the following conditions:
1. The accused shall immediately after release give his mobile
number and complete address to the IO.
2. The accused shall not contact or influence any witness in any
manner whatsoever.
3. Further, the accused shall cooperate and join the investigation
as and when required by the IO.
4. The accused will not leave country without permission of the
court.
Needless to say, the observation made herein are without
prejudice to the merits of the case. Copy of order be given dasti.
(Pawan Kumar)
Roster Judge/ASJ/25.04.2023
-- 4 of 4 --