In BAIL APPLN. 3758/2023-DEL HC- Delhi HC rejects anticipatory bail plea of man accused of torturing and wrongfully confining complainant
Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar [22-12-2023]

Read Order: INNOCENT DURU @MONDAY v. STATE THROUGH SHO

Tulip Kanth

New Delhi, December 28, 2023: In a case where the complainant alleged that the accused had tortured him and his brother, the Delhi High Court has dismissed the petition of the accused seeking anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 323/342/365/392/34 IPC.

The factual background of this case was that on 31.08.2023, the complainant was present in his house along with her brother and a friend, thereafter, in evening one of his brothers rang the bell and his another brother opened the door. As soon as the brother of the complainant closed the door, it wasalleged that the present petitioner along with co-accused persons forcefully entered the house and slapped the brother of the complainant and thereafter, they started hitting the complainant and robbed their mobile phones along with an amount of Rs 1 lakh and took the complainant his brother and his friend to All India Nigerian Students and Community Association where they were kept for about two and a half hour and were beaten by the petitioner and co-accused persons.

It was further alleged that on 01.09.2023, the complainant and his friends were again tied with chain and beaten by the present petitioner and the co-accused persons. It was further stated that the complainant was shifted to some other place where he was kept in a room till 13.09.2023 and during this period the complainant was severely beaten by the present petitioner and the co-accused persons.

Thereafter, the present petitioner brought the complainant out of the said room from where the complainant managed to escape and reached the police Station. As a result, on the basis of the written statement of the complainant, the FIR was registered.

The single-judge Bench of Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar opined that the allegations against the petitioner were grave and serious in nature. The FIR also reveals that complainant has been tortured to the maximum possible level and even Rs.1 lakh was looted from him.

“It is pertinent to note here that the complainant, even after receiving such atrocities, has made specific allegations against the petitioner. One cannot lose sight of the fact that the petitioner has been clearly visible in the CCTV footage which in my opinion is the last nail in the coffin”, the Bench noticed.

Thus, keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances and also the fact that there were specific allegations against the petitioner which were grave and serious in nature, the Bench dismissed the anticipatory bail application.