New Delhi: The Delhi High Court recently refused to grant bail to a man accused of allegedly compelling his wife for partner swapping and creating her fake online identity and sending her pictures on social media, soliciting people to make sexual relations with her for money, observing the allegations against him are not the stereotyped matrimonial dispute allegations.
Justice Girish Kathpalia was hearing a plea of the man seeking regular bail in a First Information Report (FIR) registered against him for offences under section 498A (cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), to which further offences including the offences of rape and gang rape under the IPC and under provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act were added in view of detailed statements of his wife.
“The allegations in the FIR are not the stereotyped matrimonial dispute allegations,” the High Court said and noted that apart from the serious allegations, there are also allegations of rape and gang rape against the accused husband.
The wife in her complaint accused in the FIR that her husband started compelling her to agree for wife swapping and he took her to a hotel for that purpose and his friends molested her and so she ran away. She further alleged he created her fake Insta ID and started sending her pictures on the social media, soliciting people to make sexual relations with her for money.
The woman further alleged in the FIR that her brother-in-law used to sexually harass her by touching her in inappropriate manner and outraged her modesty but when she complained about the same to her husband, the accused, he told her to ignore all that humiliation and that he used to hurt her hands with blade and make her do kitchen work with wounded hands.
The counsel appearing for the accused argued that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated and that the allegations against him are basically those arising out of matrimonial disputes, so he deserves to be released on bail.
The counsel appearing for the complainant wife opposed the bail application on the ground of severity of allegations.
The prosecution also opposed the bail application of the accused on the ground that earlier when he was granted anticipatory bail, the accused misused the liberty by threatening the complainant over phone and therefore, his bail was cancelled.
The High Court noted the nature of serious allegations against the accused and his conduct of threatening the prosecutrix when he was earlier granted anticipatory bail.
“Considering the above circumstances, I do not find it fit case to release the accused/applicant on bail. Therefore, the application is dismissed,” the High Court said while refusing to grant bail to the accused.
