State Vs. Sunil Puri and ors.

criminal procedure code, 1973 - section 439--bail--gang rape--prosecutrix, a foreign tourist on visit of india--first bail application rejected seeing the gravity of the offence--same pleas raised before vacation judge not disclosing the factum of dismissal of first application--grant of bail by said judge unsustainable--bail orders set aside and cancelled--indian penal code, 1860, section 376. ;moved second bail application during the vacation before vacation sessions judge and procured the bail without mentioning the factum of earlier bail application having been dismissed. all those pleas which were raised by them in the earlier bail application and rejected were also raised before vacation sessions judge and considering their pleas, vacation sessions judge granted the bail. ;the description of the incident by the prosecutrix makes out a very grave and serious offence. it is also had thatt fir was not lodged on the complaint of the prosecutrix but on the complaint of first secretary/counselor when the said officer was contacted. the very fact that the dismissal of their earlier bail application was not brought to the notice of vacation sessions judge as there was no reference of any order in the said orders shows the clandestine, unscrupulous and unethical ways the second bail was procured. ;the gravity of offence did not call for release of respondents on bail. the prosecutrix had come as a tourist in the country and was gang-raped by the respondents. such incidents were not only slur but. deter other tourists visiting this country. thereforee, culprits have to be dealt with heavy hands. ;the bail orders are set aside cancelling bail of the respondents. - .....language and transcribed in english language to the i.o. the respondents first approached learned a.s.j. for bail. the application for bail was dismissed vide order dated 13.5.2000.3. they moved another bail application during the vacation before vacation sessions judge and procured the bail without mentioning the factum of earlier bail application having been dismissed. all those pleas which were raised by them in the earlier bail application and rejected were also raised before vacation sessions judge and considering their pleas, the learned vacation sessions judge granted the bail.4. the description of the incident by the prosecutrix makes out a very grave and serious offence. it is also had that fir was not lodged on the complaint of the prosecutrix but on the complaint of first secretary/counselor when the said officer was contacted. the very fact that the dismissal of their earlier bail application on 13.5.2000 was not brought to the notice of vacation sessions judge as there was no reference of any order in the said orders shows the clandestine, unscrupulous and unethical ways the second bail was procured.5. absence of respondents today in spite of directions of this court also manifest their conduct. the gravity of offence did not call for release of respondents on bail. the prosecutrix had come as a tourist in the country and was gang-raped by the respondents. such incidents were not only slur but deter other tourists visiting this country. thereforee, culprits have to be dealt with heavy hands. 6. in the result, the petition is allowed. the bail orders dated 20.6.2000 and 21.6.2000 are set aside cancelling bail of the respondents. 7. the commissioner of police shall personally see that respondents are arrested and produced before the concerned court and sent to judicial custody forthwith under intimation to this court.copy of the order be sent to the police commissioner.dusty.