Man Booked For Pronouncing Talaq & Committing Gang-Rape On Wife Granted Bail By Delhi Court
A Delhi Court on Wednesday granted bail to a man who has been booked for pronouncing talaq [in contravention of Section 4 of the Muslim Woman (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019] and committing gang rape on his wife noting that "factum of gang rape is yet to be ascertained "The Additional Sessions Judge Devender Kumar ordered thus after noting that all the facts of the case would...
A Delhi Court on Wednesday granted bail to a man who has been booked for pronouncing talaq [in contravention of Section 4 of the Muslim Woman (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019] and committing gang rape on his wife noting that "factum of gang rape is yet to be ascertained "
The Additional Sessions Judge Devender Kumar 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.
Case in brief
It was alleged 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
On the other hand, Tanveer (the husband of the complainant) 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.
It was 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.
It was further submitted that even she was reluctant to make any statement u/s 164 Cr. PC, but still made the statement under the pressure of advocates.
Court's observations
At the outset, the Court 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 Court 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.
Regarding the allegations of Gang Rape, the Court 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.
"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," noted the Court.
In view of these circumstances, the Court admitted the accused 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.
Read Order