CITATION – (2020) 5 SCC 1
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
This case i.e. Sushila Aggarwal v. State of NCT of Delhi arises from the final judgment and order in Neetu Aggarwal v. State , the case pertains to the year 2012, and brief facts of the case was that the Petitioner i.e. Neetu Aggarwal being the second wife of the father of the Complainants i.e. the daughters (S and M ‘names withheld’ aged 17 years and 23 years respectively) from the first wife, was alleged to bring home her male friends and the complainants have seen her with such friends of her in indecent condition and posture. After being aware of the fact that the complainants know of it, the petitioner along with her male friends threatened them not to disclose it to her husband. On the other hand, there have been allegations against the Petitioner’s male friend and his father of touching the complainants to sexually harass them and use of force to disrobe them along with rape. In this instant matter, the FIR was filed by the two sisters in the year 2017 under Section- 376, 354, 354 (A), 354 (B) and 506, IPC 1860 & Section- 6 of Protection of Childr en from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the petitioner, her male friend, and his father at PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi .
ISSUES BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT
1. Whether protection granted to a person under Section- 438 CRPC should be limited to a fixed period to enable the person to surrender before the Trial Court and seek regular bail?
2. Whether the life of anticipatory bail should end at the time and stage when the accused is summoned by the Court?
FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
The Petitioner immediately filed an application before the High Court of Delhi seeking bail under Section- 438 apprehending an arrest in FIR No. 120/ 2017 registered at PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi. The High Court (Hon’ble Justice Pratibha Rani) after taking into consideration nature as well as the gravity of the offence alleged against the Petitioner (Section- 506, IPC) and the character of her, Court granter her bail under Section- 438 of CRPC on furnishing personal bond for Rs 50,000/- along with one surety subjecting her to the conditions as specified under Clause 2 of the Section.
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAME, DO LET ME KNOW.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at firstname.lastname@example.org