1

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2022

IN THE MATTER OF:-

SINGH ... APPLICANT

VERSUS
G .... RESPONDENT

REPLY TO FIRST APPLICATION U/S 439 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE ALONG WITH RELEVANT RULES, IN THIS HON'BLE COURT, ON
BEHALF OF APPLICANT CHOB SINGH, FOR GRANT OF BAIL, IN THE CASE
REGISTERED VIDE FIR NO. 2022; U/S: 376/506 IPC & 4 POCSO ACT AT P.S:
MEHRAULI, NOW PENDING TRIAL BEFORE THE COURT OF MS. SHREYA
ARORA MEHTA, ASJ (FTSC) (POCSO); SOUTH, SAKET COURTS COMPLEX: NEW
DELHI.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS

The Hon’ble Chief Justice and the Companion Judges of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at
New Delhi.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-

The accused has filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
for seeking bail in the above-noted case, registered against him.

A bail application moved by the accused in the Sessions Court of Ms. Shreya Arora Mehta, ASJ
(FTSC) (POCSO), South, Saket Courts Complex, New Delhi, has already been rejected vide
 2

orders dated 01.09.2022. A copy of the said order is being filed hereto for kind perusal of this
Hon'ble Court as ANNEXURE A-1.

It is further submitted that pursuant to registration of FIR on 20.06.2022 with regard to the
offences which occurred on 04.06.2022, 05.06.2022 and on 13.06.2022, the applicant was
arrested and remanded to judicial custody and even though the investigation is over and
chargesheeted, the accused should not be granted bail as he can influence the victim and can
pose a threat to the victim and her family.

Para-wise reply to the Bail Application

1. That with respect to paragraph no. 1 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that the FIR against the accused has been lodged by the complainant on the basis of true
accounts of facts.

2. That with respect to paragraph no. 2 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that the facts stated in the FIR with respect to the offence are reiterated to be true and the
same falls under the provisions of the POCSO Act.

3. That with respect to paragraph no. 3 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that there is strong evidence against the accused that can be corroborated with the medical
evidence.

4. That with respect to paragraph no. 4 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that the victim-respondent is a minor aged about 12 years and was severely threatened and
traumatised by the applicant at various instances, which led to the inevitable lapse of time
resulting in the registering of the FIR on the 7th day after the incident. Therefore, it is
contended that there can be discrepancies with regard to the time of the incident.
 3

5. That with respect to paragraph no. 5 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that the respondent is a minor aged about 12 years. It is reiterated that the victim was
severely threatened and traumatised by the applicant at various instances. It is pertinent to
note that in lieu of the threats made by the applicant on multiple instances, the respondent
was unable to disclose the instances due to the fear for her and her parents lives and was only
able to disclose the same when her health was deteriorating, and she was questioned by her
parents. Therefore, it is submitted that due to the fear instilled in the victim by the applicant,
the same should be taken into account for the inevitable lapse of time in the registering of the
FIR.

6. That with respect to paragraph no. 6 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that the contentions of the applicant have already been addressed in paragraph number 4 of
this application and deems no further reply.

7. That with respect to paragraph no. 7 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that the respondent is a minor aged about 12 years. It is reiterated that the victim was
severely threatened and traumatised by the applicant at various instances. It is pertinent to
note that due to the threats made by the applicant on multiple instances, the respondent was
unable to disclose the instances due to the fear for her and her parents lives and was only able
to disclose the same later when her health was deteriorating and she was questioned by her
parents. It is submitted that the medical procedure and the evidence gathered thereof was
independent of any alleged influence by the fact that the procedure was carried out by a
private medical professional and that the mother of the victim is employed in the same
institution.

8. That with respect to paragraph no. 8 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that the FIR against the accused-applicant has been lodged by the respondent on the basis of
true account of facts and that the victim-respondent is a minor aged about 12 years and was
severely threatened and traumatised by the applicant at various instances, which led to the
inevitable lapse of time resulting in the registering of the FIR on the 7th day after the
incident.
 4

9. That with respect to paragraph no. 9 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that multiple instances of sexual assault have been committed by the accused-applicant on
04.06.2022 and on 05.06.2022 along with the instance of Penetrative Sexual Assault on
13.06.2022 and the same should also be taken into account. It is submitted that it was never a
contention that the victim had entered the shop or crossed the counter of the shop. As the
accused was well aware of the presence of camera inside the shop, he never committed the
act inside the shop which was in the sight of the CCTV camera as it would have been
recorded. Therefore, the grievous act was committed by the accused-applicant on the victim
outside the purview of the CCTV camera and the same is reiterated in the FIR that the
accused opened the counter of the shop and he put his hand inside the victim’s shorts and
touched her private part, who was standing outside the counter.

10. That with respect to paragraph no. 10 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that the victim-respondent is a minor aged about 12 years and was severely threatened and
traumatised by the applicant at various instances instilling fear for her and her parents lives.
It is therefore submitted that the accused should not be granted bail as he can influence the
victim and can pose a threat to the victim and her family.

11. That with respect to paragraph no. 11 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it is submitted
that the facts of the case cited in the bail application namely, Firoz Khan vs. NCT of Delhi,
Bail Appl. No. 945/2020 were that he was neither named in the FIR nor there was any
allegation in the FIR nor any other material collected during the investigation, that would
identify the applicant as one of the perpetrators of the offences alleged. While in our case the
detention of the accused is required for the safety of the victim and her family, while the trial
is ongoing. Further, in the case of Sudha Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh and others (LL
2021 SC 229), it was observed by the apex court that "It is needless to point out that in cases
of this nature, it is important that courts do not enlarge an accused on bail with a blinkered
vision by just taking into account only the parties before them and the incident in question. It
is necessary for courts to consider the impact that release of such persons on bail will have
on the witnesses yet to be examined and the innocent members of the family of the victim who
 5

might be the next victims", and that "There is no doubt that liberty is important, even that of
a person charged with crime but it is important for the courts to recognise the potential
threat to the life and liberty of victims/witnesses, if such accused is released on bail". Thus,
the detention of the accused is well justified.

12. That with respect to paragraph nos. 12,13,14 and 15 of the bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., it
is submitted that the contentions are made to take undue advantage and on release of bail, the
accused will certainly abuse the liberty of bail and will try to influence the victim and will
not cooperate in the investigation and there is a high probability of him absconding.

PRAYER

In view of the facts and circumstances, explained hereinabove and also in the best interest of
justice, it is most humbly prayed that the bail application of the accused may kindly be rejected
in case registered vide FIR No. 2022; under Sections 376/506 IPC and 4 POCSO Act at P.S:
Mehrauli, now pending trial before the Court of Ms. Shreya Arora Mehra, ASJ (FTSC)
(POCSO), South, Saket Courts, New Delhi.

Any other order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and appropriate, in the facts and
circumstances already explained above, may also be passed in favour of the respondent in the
best interest of justice.

Respondent
Through
Advocates
New Delhi Drsika Bhutani and Shivam
Dated: