Delhi Court denies bail to businessman in rape case of northeast woman
Nov 06, 2021
New Delhi [India], November 6 : A Delhi Court has denied bail to a businessman accused of raping and threatening a northeast girl, observing his alleged involvement in various other cases.
Saket's Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Prashant Sharma dismissed the bail application of Delhi-based Kashmiri businessman Sahil Zaroo, who was arrested in August for allegedly raping and threatening a young professional from Northeast India.
The court turned down the plea of defence counsel that charge-sheet, in this case, has been filed and therefore, accused is no more required for the purpose of investigation saying "The said argument is not tenable as filing of charge-sheet by itself does not lessen the allegations of prosecution in any manner," as held in judgement titled as Virupakshappa Gouda vs the state of Karnataka.
The court also noted that as per the report of the Investigation Officer, the accused was involved in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) case allegedly involving Rahul Mahajan under section 27 of NDPS Act and was also questioned in National Investigation Agency (NIA) case relating to hawala money in connection with DSP Davinder Singh, Jammu and Kashmir Police.
Besides that, one FIR was lodged against the accused in involving the slapping of Bollywood actor Sonal Chauhan.
"So, accused has no clear criminal antecedents. He is not a have not of the society. Further, the offence in question entails serious punishment. There are chances that the accused may influence the complainant and other witnesses. Accused may temper with the evidence. Keeping in mind the above facts and circumstances of this case, the accused is not entitled to bail. Accordingly, bail application of accused Sahil Zaroo stands dismissed," the court said.
According to police, the accused has allegedly raped the complainant after a party, when she lost consciousness. The survivor lodged a complaint with the Delhi Police against Sahil Zaroo on August 18, two days after the incident under sections 376 and 328 of the Indian Penal Code.
The complainant was represented by advocates Joicy and Alana Golmei.
