A Delhi Court recently comprising of a bench of Additional Sessions Judge Devender Kumar granted bail to a man accused of committing gang-rape on his wife and pronouncing talaq in contravention of Section 4 of the Muslim Woman (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 (State v. Tanveer)
The bench ordered thus after noting that all the facts of the case would be clear only after the completion of the investigation, however, during this period, the accused had a strong defence and therefore, was entitled for bail.
Facts of the case
The present petition was filed by the wife alleging that the accused (Tanveer) had pronounced Talaq on his wife, the complainant and also committed rape upon her, against her wishes and even allowed his friend Naseem to do the similar act and that this act was well covered under the category of gang rape.
The contention of the Parties
The husband Tanveer claimed that he had not divorced her till date and therefore, he had not committed any offence under section 4 of the Muslim Woman (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act as alleged in the FIR.
The husband further submitted that the complainant was well aware that the accused had not committed any offence due to which, she introduced an entirely new story of co-accused Naseem that he allegedly committed the rape upon her just to get him booked in a false gang rape case.
It was also contended that she had admitted during a conversation with family members of the accused that she has falsely implicated the accused at the instance and under the influence of her advocates.
The husband also argued that the wife was even reluctant to make any statement u/s 164 Cr. PC, but still made the statement under the pressure of advocates.
Courts Observation and Judgment
The Court at the very outset noted that the Accused had been lying in Judicial Custody since July 15, 2021 and was arrested with the allegations of gang rape of his wife with one Naseem, but Naseem's identity as accused could not be verified by the IO.
The bench noted that IO had categorically admitted that the involvement of Naseem could not be verified from any angle and rather a previous enmity between the ld. Counsel for the complainant and Naseem had been revealed.
The Court also observed that even cell locations of Naseem and complainant were found at different places at the time of the alleged incident which had created a doubt in the involvement of the accused in the case.
The court taking note of the allegations of Gang Rape, opined that the factum of gang rape was yet to be ascertained, whereas the prosecutrix had denied her internal medical examination to prove this fact and that the case was mainly based upon the oral testimony of the complainant.
The court noted, "It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant has been visiting the house of the accused despite the allegations of gang rape against her husband and she has tendered any plausible explanation to it."
The Court granting the bail to the accused remarked, "In view of allegations against the accused, conversation of prosecutrix with family members of accused and her admission towards it, alleged role of the advocates in lodging this FIR and also the submission of IO regarding evidence against co-accused Naseem, I am of the considered opinion that all the facts would clear only after completion of investigation, but during this period, accused has strong defence and is entitled for bail. Accordingly, I hereby admit accused Tanveer on bail, on furnishing of personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of Ld. MM/ Link MM /Duty MM concerned.
Accused shall join investigation as and directed by the IO and shall not try to influence witnesses in any manner and shall have no contact with any witness or complainant, directly or indirectly. He shall not leave Delhi without the permission of this court, provided he is permanent resident of Delhi. Accused shall share his mobile number and location with IO so that he may be contacted in any exigency. Any violation of conditions shall attract cancellation of this bail."
Read Judgment;
source ; .latestlaws.com/
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments