Tannu v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors

O R D E R %

20.11.2024 CRL.M.A. 26551/2024 (exemption)

¶1Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶2The application stands disposed of. CRL.M.C. 6952/2024

¶3The Listing Branch is directed not to mention the name of the petitioner in the cause list and refer it as 'XXX'.

¶4The present petition is filed challenging the order dated

14.08.2024, pursuant to which the Respondent No. 2 was granted pre-arrest bail. The petition has been filed essentially on the ground that the family of the accused is threatening and pressurising the prosecutrix.

¶5The petitioner alleged that a complaint in that regard was made to the concerned Investigating Officer, however, no action has been taken.

¶6Status report has been filed. It is pointed out that during the inquiry, the Call Detail Records (CDR) of the mobile number of the father of the complainant and one family member of the accused, who had allegedly made a threatening call to the petitioner, was looked into. From the analysis of the CDR, it This is a digitally signed order. was found that the first call was made by the father of the victim to the said relative of the accused on 01.08.2024.

¶7Thereafter, calls were exchanged between both the persons, out of which, on five occasions calls were made by the father of the complainant and on five occasions, the calls were made by the relative of the accused.

¶8The allegations of threat were not substantiated.

¶9The Investigating Officer also informs that the family members of the accused were interacted and they had informed that the calls were made by them as well as by the father of the complainant in order to make an endeavour for arriving at some sort of amicable settlement.

¶10Chargesheet has already been filed for offences under Sections 313/376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶11The offences alleged are serious and are not compoundable. The conduct of the parties whether it is the family of the complainant or the family of the accused in trying to reach each other for the purpose of settlement can be taken as an effort to influence the witnesses and the same is not permissible.

¶12It is not substantiated that any threat to life or liberty has been made by the family of the accused. Further, it is not alleged that the accused has himself extended any threats.

¶13In view of the above, this Court does not consider it apposite to entertain the present petition.

¶14The petition is, therefore, dismissed. AMIT MAHAJAN, J NOVEMBER 20, 2024/"SK" This is a digitally signed order.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 6952/2024 XXX .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Amitava Poddar & Mr. Narvinder Singh, Advs. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Naresh Kumar Chahar, APP for the State. SI Rakhi, PS Jyoti Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN