TOHEED KHAN vs STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) AND ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 28th January, 2025 + BAIL APPLN. 178/2025 TOHEED KHAN s/o Mr. Alimuddin R/o H. No. 267, Ground Floor, Hauz Rani, Malviya Nagar, South Delhi-110017 .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Lokesh Kumar Mishra, Mr. Haider Khan & Mr. Devansh Sehgal, Advocates Versus STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1-State with SI Sandeep Victim in person CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. The present Application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 528 of the Act, has been filed on behalf of the Applicant seeking bail in FIR No. 500/2024, under Sections 137(2)/64 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 6/21 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Signature Not Verified BAIL APPLN. 178/2025 Page 1 of 5 DigitallySigned By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Date:28.01.2025 20:43:14 2012 (‘POCSO Act’), registered at Police Station Malviya Nagar, Delhi. 2. It is submitted that Petitioner had applied for Regular Bail under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which has been dismissed by the learned Additional Session Judge vide order dated 24.12.2024. It is submitted that the Applicant has been falsely implicated by the Bua of the victim on account of her greed for property and money. The FIR has been registered with the sole intent to extort money and the present FIR is gross misuse of process of law. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.08.2024, the victim had gone missing and an FIR was got registered on 02.10.2024 on the complaint of the mother of the victim. In fact, the real story is that the Applicant and the Victim got ma