KASHISH BATRA Vs. STATE
LAWS(DLH)-2021-4-50
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on April 05,2021

Kashish Batra Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

ANIL MAHAJAN VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND ANR [REFERRED TO]
RAM GOVIND UPADHYAY VS. SUDARSHAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. OM PRAKASH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. RAMDEV SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SINGH SETHIA VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
SUKH RAM VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
LILLU ALIAS RAJESH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Subramonium Prasad,J. - (1.)The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for seeking regular bail in FIR No.442/2020, dated 28.10.2020, registered at Police Station Tigri, Delhi, under Sections 370, 370(A), 372, 374, 376 and 342 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
(2.)On 28.10.2020, a complaint was given by the prosecutrix stating that she is studying in 8th standard and is staying with her family at B-453, Sangam Vihar, New Delhi. It is stated that her father caught her chatting with a boy named Nadeem with whom she had fallen in love. It is stated that on 11.07.2020, her elder brother once again caught her talking/chatting on phone with Nadeem and he slapped her. The prosecutrix states that she left her home and got into a battery rickshaw. She did not have her mobile phone. She did not had any money. She states that in that rickshaw she met one Imrana who inquired as to why the prosecutrix was crying. She states that Imrana told her that she works for an NGO and that she would help the prosecutrix. It is stated that Imrana took the prosecutrix to her home, gave her food and took her to KNF Hotel, Gurgaon where the petitioner was present. It is stated in the complaint that Imrana and the petitioner herein gave her something to drink and she became semiconscious and the petitioner raped her. It is stated that even though she was not fully conscious she could feel that she was being raped and could see the petitioner who had removed all his clothes. It is stated that Imrana kept the prosecutrix at the Hotel for three days and when she told Imrana that she wanted to go home, Imrana took her home but told her that she should not reveal that she has been raped. It is stated that when she went back home she refused to stay with her parents because she was frightened. It is stated that the prosecutrix came back with Imrana who sent her with one Rashid. It is stated that Rashid took the prosecutrix to Moti Nagar and raped her. It is stated that the prosecutrix ran away from Imrana and Rashid and went to Greater Noida where a man named Mukesh gave her his phone and she spoke to Nadeem, who asked her to come to Meerut. It is stated that when she went to Meerut, Nadeem refused to keep her with him. It is stated that Mukesh brought the prosecutrix back to Greater Noida and took her to his house where she spent 14 days with Mukesh. Her family was informed and her uncle took her back home. On the said statement, FIR under Sections 370, 370(A), 372, 374, 376 and 342 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act was registered.
(3.)Statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C before the Magistrate wherein she reiterated her statement given in the complaint. Investigation was conducted. During investigation, Imrana, Kashish Batra (the petitioner herein) and Rashid were arrested. The petitioner was arrested on 23.11.2020. It is stated that during the investigation the prosecutrix along with her mother were taken to FNF Co Living, U Block, DLF III Gurgaon, where it is alleged that the petitioner raped the victim. The investigation revealed that the petitioner was living as a paying guest in a company called FNF Co Living, where the victim was raped. The Manager of FNF Co Living revealed that on the request of the mother of the petitioner he allowed him to run a kitchen in his Paying Guest accommodation at the ground floor. The petitioner started visiting his Paying Guest premises since June, 2020 and he used to stay there at night as he had to start the kitchen in the said premises.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.