A Delhi Court on Wednesday granted bail to a man who has been booked for multiple charges based on his wife’s complaint. The husband has been accused of
- Pronouncing talaq [in contravention of Section 4 of the Muslim Woman (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019]
- Committing gang rape on his wife
…noting that “factum of gang rape is yet to be ascertained”
The Additional Sessions Judge Devender Kumar noted the facts of the case and ordered that the charges would be clear only after the completion of the investigation. The judge further said that, during this period, the accused had a strong defence and therefore, was entitled for bail.
Allegations by Wife:
A man named Tanveer (husband of the complainant woman) has been accused of pronouncing Talaq on his wife, the complainant and also accused of committing rape upon her, against her wishes. The woman has also accused her husband of allowing his friend Naseem to sexually exploit her and that this act was well covered under the category of gang rape.
Defense by Husband:
On the other hand, Tanveer claimed that he had not divorced her till date and therefore, he had not committed any offence under section 4 of the Muslim Woman (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act as alleged in the FIR.
The husband further submitted that the complainant was well aware that the accused had not committed any offence due to which, she introduced an entirely new story of co-accused Naseem that he allegedly committed the rape upon her just to get him booked in a false gang rape case.
It was also contended that she had admitted during a conversation with family members of the accused that she has falsely implicated the accused at the instance and under the influence of her advocates.
The husband also argued that the wife was even reluctant to make any statement u/s 164 Cr. PC, but still made the statement under the pressure of advocates.
At the outset, the court noted that the accused Tanveer had been arrested on charges on gang rape and was in in judicial custody since July 15, 2021, however, Naseem’s identity as accused could not be verified by the IO. The judge noted,
I have heard the arguments of both parties and gone through the record. Accused has been lying in JC since 15.07.2021 and was arrested with the allegations of gang rape of his wife with one Naseem, but identity of that Naseem as accused could not be verified by the IO.
IO has categorically admitted that the involvement of Naseem could not be verified from any angle and rather previous enmity between the ld. Counsel for complainant and Naseem has revealed. Even cell locations of Naseem and complainant were found at different places at the time of alleged incident which has created a doubt in the involvement of accused to this case.
Adding further, the court said,
The conversation amongst the prosecutrix, brother and sister-in-law of accused, duly verified by the IO, has proved that she has admitted many facts in favour of the applicant including the role of her advocate in lodging this FIR.
With regards to the allegations of gang rape, the court opined that the factum of gang rape was yet to be ascertained, whereas the prosecutrix had denied her internal medical examination to prove this fact and that the case was mainly based upon the oral testimony of the complainant. The court noted:
It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant has been visiting the house of the accused despite the allegations of gang rape against her husband and she has tendered any plausible explanation to it.
The husband was subsequently granted bail on furnishing of personal bond of Rs 50,000 and one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of Ld. MM/ Link MM /Duty MM concerned.
ALSO READ –
ALSO WATCH –
Hyderabad Police Commissioner Apologises To 4 Wrongly Accused Auto Drivers In False Gang Rape Case
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below