0

The only non-bailable Section invoked against him is Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000: High Court Of Delhi

The petitioner/accused be released on execution of personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with a surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court was upheld by the High Court Of Delhi through the learned bench led by HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH in the case of HIMANSHU KUMAR Vs STATE NCT OF DELHI (BAIL APPLN. 929/2022) on 05.05.2022.

Brief facts of the case are that this is an application for regular bail moved by the petitioner in case FIR No. 0279 dated 03.06.2021, which was registered under Section 354 (D) IPC and Section 66(E)/67(A) of Information Technology Act, 2000 at PS Amar Colony, District South East, New Delhi. . The accused had earlier approached the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate for his regular bail under Section 437 Cr.P.C., which was dismissed on 16.03.2022 and the learned ASJ had dismissed his regular bail application vide order dated 04.03.2022.

The is 30 years old graduate and has not committed any of the offences as alleged in the FIR. The petitioner and the complainant have known each other since March 2019 as both of them are gamers and they had met on a virtual gaming platform. The petitioner was served with a notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. on 04.10.2021. The petitioner, in compliance to the said notice, appeared before the police officials on 11.10.2021, and thereafter, he provided all the information sought by the police officials. He had also surrendered his mobile phone as asked by the police officials. He had also opened his iCloud account on his mobile phone and showed all the contents to the IO and similarly, the contents on his computer were also shown. he received a call from a police official that he had to appear on 19.10.2021 but he informed that he was already asked to appear on 19.11.2021, so he had made his travel arrangements accordingly.

The petitioner has been accused of having committed offences under Section 354(D) of IPC and and Section 66(E) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which are bailable offences and only non-bailable offence alleged against him is under Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. As per the petitioner, the said Section is not attracted to the facts of the case.

The petitioner surrendered on 22.02.2022, and thereafter, he is still in custody.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he had posted on Instagram 4-5 pictures of the petitioner kissing the complainant on her cheek. Both of them were in live-in relationship.

The court observed “I am inclined to grant regular bail to the accused/applicant on the following conditions: (i) The accused/applicant shall not contact or try to contact the victim/complainant, either physically or virtually or through any other person with a view to threaten or intimidate the complainant in any manner whatsoever. (ii) The accused/applicant shall not in any way tamper with the electronic evidence in the present case. (iii) The accused/applicant shall appear before the concerned expert of FSL on 10.06.2022 to give his voice samples. (iv) The accused/applicant shall not in any way circulate any defamatory/objectionable material against the present complainant on any platform during the pendency of the trial. (v) The accused/applicant shall not leave the country without the permission from the learned Trial Court. (vi) The accused/applicant shall appear before the Court on each and every date when his matter is listed.”

The court held that subject to the above conditions, the petitioner/accused be released on execution of personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with a surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

Click here to read the Judgement

Written by- Riya Singh, Legal Intern, Prime Legal

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat