Tag Archives: #section375

Case Title: Babu Lal Bhawariya v. State of NCT Delhi

Date of decision: 19th June 2023

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

 + BAIL APPLN. 3093/2022 and CRL.M.A. No. 3550/2023

Introduction

The High Court of Delhi has denied bail to an instructor suspected of continually assaulting a minor learner and attempting to make a viral video of the incident. The defendant has been charged under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of the legislation known as the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act of 2012.

“The court is unable to disregard the evidence showing that the petitioner and prosecutrix had contact as a teacher and student,” Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani stated in the order. The court stated that there appears to be significant forensic evidence against the petitioner, such as the forensic report stating that the petitioner’s DNA matches the DNA discovered on certain exhibits pertaining to the prosecutrix that were collected during the investigation.

Facts of the Case

“Taking into account that the meeting between the complainant and the prosecutrix was only meant to have been between an instructor and a student, it is unclear why the DNA matches,” the court said.

According to the prosecution, on April 20, 2021, the accused teacher requested the prosecutrix to come to see him at the Rithala Metro Station under the pretence of providing her with exam notes. Upon meeting the prosecutor, he allegedly told her he needed to give her additional documents that were at his residence.

It is alleged that at his residence, the teacher offered the prosecutor water and refreshments, after which she collapsed and he engaged in sexual contact against her against her will. When the prosecutor regained consciousness, she allegedly presented her with an objectionable video recording of the incident and threatened to make the video viral if she told anyone about it. According to the prosecution, while threatening to make the objectionable video go viral, the teacher engaged in sexual activity with the prosecutor approximately four times at his residence and seven times in hotels.

According to the prosecutrix’s Class-II School Leaving Certificate and Class-X Mark Sheet, which were lodged alongside the chargesheet, the prosecutrix was “minor” at the time of the commission of some of the alleged sexual assaults. It was asserted that the prosecutrix reached the age of majority in January 2022, and that the petitioner continued to engage in sexual acts with her afterward. After the alleged last incident in June 2022, a complaint was submitted with the police and a FIR was registered.

Courts analysis and Decision

The court stated that the prosecutor’s statement recorded pursuant to section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code supports the prosecution’s case, and the court has no reason to disbelieve the statement. Justice Bhambhani added, “It is also part of the record, but has not yet been proven by evidence, that the petitioner paid for the hotel room and checked into the hotel with the prosecutrix using a false ID.

“In light of the facts of the case, particularly the petitioner’s relative social standing vis-à-vis the prosecutor and the societal milieu, this court cannot be certain that the petitioner would not influence witnesses, flee justice, or otherwise attempt to prejudice the trial of the case if he is released on bail,” the court stated.

Judgment- click here to review the judgment

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Anushka Satwani