The Delhi High Court has denied pre-arrest bail to a woman accused in a honey trap case.
The court rejected her anticipatory bail plea on the ground that the investigation was at a nascent stage and it was yet to be ascertained if she was involved in any other cases.
Justice Subramonium Prasad said that the woman was accused of a serious offence and there was a likelihood of her fleeing from justice.
“Charge-sheet qua the petitioner (accused woman) is yet to be filed. The petitioner's voice sample has to be taken and the investigation has also to be conducted as to whether there are any other cases in which the petitioner is involved and as stated earlier the investigation is at a nascent stage. The petitioner is accused of an offence under Section 328 IPC which is a serious offence,” the judge said.
Section 328 IPC makes administration of intoxicating drug with intent to cause hurt or commit or to facilitate the commission of an offence punishable with imprisonment up to ten years.
“This Court feels that this is not a fit case where the petitioner should be granted bail in the event of arrest. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed,” the court in its August 16 order said.
In the present case, the FIR stated that the complainant had gone to the house of a person known to him, who introduced the accused woman to the complainant as his girlfriend.
It is claimed that after consuming a soft drink, the complainant started feeling dizzy and became unconscious.
After re-gaining consciousness, the complainant was shocked to see the accused woman with him in an objectionable position, it is alleged.
As per the complaint, the complainant then narrated the incident to his friend.
However, the duo started demanding a mobile phone, a TV and Rs two lakh in cash from him, it added.
It was alleged that the complainant was threatened that if demands were not met the woman herein would file a case of rape against him.
`Eventually, an FIR for the alleged commission of offence of rape was also filed against the complainant at the behest of the woman and her boyfriend.
The court said that “a reading of the FIR shows that this is a case of honey trap” and balance has to be struck between free and fair investigation on one hand and prevention of harassment and unjustified detention on the other.
The court said that there was “some justification” in the prosecution's stand that the woman's conduct showed the likelihood of her fleeing from justice and that she would not cooperate with the investigation.
It further said that the probability of the woman and her boyfriend threatening the complainant also could not be ruled out at this stage.
The police opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail on the ground that the present case was that of honey trapping and the moment the complainant filed the instant FIR, the woman went into hiding and surfaced only when the co-accused, her boyfriend, was granted bail.
(PTI inputs)
