Delhi High Court: In an application filed by Vikas Malu, who has infamously been accused of murder of late actor Satish Kaushik by his wife, is seeking anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 323, 354, 376, 377, 506, 509 and 34 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) . Rajnish Bhatnagar, J., granted anticipatory bail to the accused in totality of the facts and circumstances of the case at hand on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the station house officer.
As per the complaint filed by Vikas Malu’s second wife Saanvi Malu (complainant), she has been allegedly raped and threatened by her husband and co-accused Vineet Malu. She alleged that she was molested and beaten by two daughters of the petitioner. She also alleged that the daughters have sexually tortured her , and the son has made sexual advances on her on various occasions and raped her.
Stating verbatim “on 14-08-2022, daughters of the petitioner molested the complainant by ordering her to walk on her hands and legs like an animal and when complainant refused the same, then Harshita (daughter of the petitioner) said “Chal Saali Ko Maza Chakhate Hain, Hamare Order Ko Mana Kar Rahi Hai” and thereafter both the daughters of the petitioner pinned down the complainant to the floor and further Sakshi (daughter of petitioner) held both the hands of the complainant and Harshita started slapping on her face and when the complainant became semi-conscious, Sakshi spread her legs and she further inserted her middle finger in vagina of the complainant and thereafter forcibly put those fingers in the mouth of the complainant.”
According to the petitioner, the victim joined the company of the petitioner on 04-04-2009 as a receptionist and continued thereafter, and it was only after the petitioner obtained a divorce from his first wife, they started seeing each other and had a consensual relationship. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the victim shifted to Dubai on 29-09-2017 on employment visa in the company of the petitioner, and thereafter they started living together, and also travelled to Vienna and Budapest where they shared and remained in the same hotel . According to the petitioner, they were known to each other from 04-04-2009, and were in a relationship prior to the incident of February 2019.
The Court noted that the victim has failed to give any details like date of event, name of event and where the event was supposed to be held for which she was called by the petitioner at his home for discussions when the alleged rape happened for the first time. Neither the rape incident was reported by her to the police or to any of her family members, or even to her mother nor she visited any hospital for the alleged merciless beatings given to her.
On the contention of the victim that the act of rape was videographed by the petitioner, the Court further noted that it is highly impossible for a person to commit rape and make a video of the said act at the same time by himself, has force in it. “The victim in the present case, is a grown-up lady of more than 30 years of age, and though she has not stated that she resisted the rape by the petitioner but definitely when she used the word “forcibly”” so she must have resisted the rape and one can very well imagine in such a scenario, it seems highly impossible for a person to commit rape and make a video of rape simultaneously by himself.”
The victim placed on record over six CDs to the IO which contained audio and video recordings regarding the sexual assault committed by the petitioner and his son and daughters, to which, the Court observed that as per the additional status report, the audio and video of recordings were edited clippings of long recordings and thus, no conclusive inference was drawn.
The Court further noted that the petitioner joined the investigation and submitted his passport along with his mobile phone and nothing incriminating was found in the said mobile phone. The status report revealed that the petitioner and the victim were in touch from 2008 till 2009 and they were in a relationship since 2017. On perusal of a bunch of documents containing air tickets, bookings of hotel accommodations, salary details and employment contract of the victim, copy of the foreign passport of the petitioner, marriage certificate along with the hard disk containing videos of parties, functions and trips etc. of the petitioner with the victim shows a picture contrary to the allegations.
As per a pen drive placed on record by the petitioner, it is clear that she has accompanied the petitioner to Chandigarh to attend the Celebrity Cricket League and partied there alongwith celebrities in 2019. Therefore, the allegations of rape and merciless beatings given to her by the petitioner in the month of February 2019 does not inspire confidence as during the last days of February 2019, the victim had accompanied the petitioner to Chandigarh to attend Celebrity Cricket League (CCL) and partied with the celebrities.
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner as nothing has been handed over by the victim in support of her allegations, rather the status reports reveal that no documents or her mobile phone has been provided by the victim/complainant to the investigating officer.
[Vikas Malu v State of NCT of Delhi, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 3038, decided on 19-05-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Pradeep Jain, Mr. R. K. Thakur, Mr. Shubhankar Jha, Mr. Ashish Bansal and Mr. Sambhav Jain, Advocates for the Petitioner;
Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with Insp. Manjusha, PS R. K. Puram. Mr. Rajender Chhabra and Mr. Rajesh Chhabra, Advocates for the complainant along with the complainant in person.
