Delhi High Court
Nikund Kumar Jha vs State Of Nct Delhi & Anr on 9 June, 2025
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 09.06.2025
+ BAIL APPLN. 1888/2025 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 1092/2025
NIKUND KUMAR JHA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anil Kumar Mishra and Mr.
Ankit Dhawan, Advocate
versus
STATE OF NCT DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Aman Usman, APP for State.
Mr. Sarthak Tomar, Advocate for
Complainant.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 610/2024,
registered at PS K.N. Katju Marg, North Delhi for offences under Section
498A/406/34 IPC, to which further offences including the offences under
Section 376/328/354A/376D IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act were added in
view of detailed statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164
CrPC.
2. Learned counsel for the accused/applicant contends that the
accused/applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated because on his
BAIL APPLN. 1888/2025 Page 1 of 4 pages
Signature Not Verified
GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH
KATHPALIA
Digitally Signed
KATHPALIA Date: 2025.06.09 14:21:16
+05’30’
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:09.06.2025
14:55:25
complaint under Section 494 IPC, the prosecutrix was called by the police
for preparing Action Taken Report. It is further contended that the
allegations against the accused/applicant are basically those arising out of
matrimonial disputes, so the accused/applicant deserves to be released on
bail. Learned counsel for accused/applicant also submits that at the time of
the alleged sexual offences under POCSO Act, the accused/applicant was
aged about 17 years 06 months, though he also clarified that he is not
arguing that case under POCSO Act is not sustainable on account of age.
Further, it is argued that none of the allegations mentioned in the FIR has
been repeated in the charge-sheet.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for prosecutrix opposes the bail
application on the ground of severity of allegations.
4. Learned APP opposes the bail application on the ground that earlier,
the accused/applicant was granted anticipatory bail by the Court of Sessions
but he misused the liberty by threatening the prosecutrix over phone,
regarding which, text chats have been already placed on record, therefore,
the anticipatory bail was cancelled and consequently the accused/applicant
was arrested.
5. The allegations in the FIR are not the stereotyped matrimonial dispute
allegations. The accused/applicant is husband of the prosecutrix, according
to the accused/applicant. The prosecutrix has alleged in the FIR itself that
BAIL APPLN. 1888/2025 Page 2 of 4 pages
GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH
KATHPALIA
Signature Not Verified
KATHPALIA Date: 2025.06.09 14:21:30
+05’30’
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:09.06.2025
14:55:25
her brother in law used to sexually harass her by touching her in
inappropriate manner and outraged her modesty but when she complained
before her husband, the accused/applicant, he told her to ignore all that
humiliation; that the accused/applicant used to hurt her hands with blade and
make her do kitchen work with wounded hands; that the accused/applicant
started compelling her to agree for wife swapping and for that purpose, he
took her to a hotel where his friends molested her, so she ran away; and that
the accused/applicant created her fake Insta ID and started sending her
pictures on the social media, soliciting people to make sexual relations with
her for money.
6. Apart from the serious allegations mentioned above, there are also
allegations of rape and gang rape in statement under Section 164 CrPC of
the prosecutrix.
7. Further, it appears that earlier when granted anticipatory bail, the
accused/applicant admittedly got in touch with the prosecutrix and
exchanged text chats, copies whereof are on record. It would be significant
to note that those text chats were made by the accused/applicant under
fictitious name through a new SIM card, but in investigation, the said SIM
was found to be registered in his name. The accused/applicant also admitted
before the Court of Sessions about this contact by him with the prosecutrix.
BAIL APPLN. 1888/2025 Page 3 of 4 pages
GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH
KATHPALIA
Signature Not Verified
KATHPALIA Date: 2025.06.09 14:21:45
+05'30'
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:09.06.2025
14:55:25
8. Considering the above circumstances, I do not find it fit case to
release the accused/applicant on bail. Therefore, the application is
dismissed.
9. At request of learned counsel for accused/applicant, it is made clear
that the above observations are solely on the issue of bail and not on merits
of the case.
Digitally signed by
GIRISH GIRISH KATHPALIA
KATHPALIA Date: 2025.06.09
14:21:59 +05'30'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
JUNE 09, 2025/as
BAIL APPLN. 1888/2025 Page 4 of 4 pages
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:09.06.2025
14:55:25