spinner

Delhi High Court Refuses to Cancel Anticipatory Bail for LJP MP Prince Raj in Rape Case

Last Updated: 19-02-2024 04:38:28pm
Delhi High Court Refuses to Cancel Anticipatory Bail for LJP MP Prince Raj in Rape Case

The High Court of Delhi has refused to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to Lok Janshkati Party MP Prince Raj in an alleged rape case.Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed the petition by the complainant woman while observing that the relief was granted to Raj by the trial court in 2021 after considering the material before it, & pre-arrest bail cannot be cancelled on “mere asking” as the right to liberty is a crucial right.“The anticipatory bail order was passed on the basis of material collected & placed on record i.e. the audio recordings & the transcript (of prosecutrix on the relationship being consensual)….along with other material regarding an FIR regarding extortion registered against prosecutrix prior in time,” the court recorded in a recent order.“There is no subsequent event shown to this court which warrants any interference with the order granting bail to the accused persons. Considering the same, this court is not inclined to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the accused which should not be cancelled on mere asking as an individual’s right to liberty is a crucial right which cannot be interfered with lightly,” the court concludedRaj, a nephew of late Ram Vilas Paswan & cousin of Chirag Paswan, is a Member of Parliament (MP) from Samastipur in Bihar.Prince Raj belongs to the LJP faction led by his uncle & union minister Pashupati Kumar Paras.The woman, who claimed she was an LJP worker, has accused Raj of raping her while she was unconscious.The woman challenged the trial court’s September 25, 2021 order granting anticipatory bail to the politician on several grounds including that there was an “unusual delay” in lodging the FIR.In the order, Justice Sharma observed that once granted, bail should not be cancelled in a “mechanical manner”. She said the trial court had passed a “detailed & reasoned order” while granting anticipatory bail, & the accused being a Member of Parliament was “not the criteria or reason for grant of bail”.On the complainant’s claim that her car was attacked by the accused, the court said no material has come on record to show that such acts were committed by him or by others at his behest.There was nothing on record to substantiate the prosecutrix’s claim that Raj was posting inappropriate messages & content against her on social media, added the court.The court, however, said the complainant would be at liberty to approach the Witness Protection Committee in case of any threat being extended to her & the SHO concerned shall ensure prompt action is taken as per law.Lawyer Nitesh Rana, appearing for Raj, earlier argued it was a case of honey trap & extortion & that the politician was being wrongly.The trial court, in its order, had noted that the complainant & her male friend were extorting money & blackmailing the politician since 2020.It had observed that the possibility of “falsely implicating” Raj could not be ruled out & his custodial interrogation was not required in this case as nothing was to be recovered from him. 

TAGS: High Court of Delhi Anticipatory bail Prince Raj Rape case Trial court


Latest Posts

Karnataka High Court Upholds BDA Land Acquisition, Dismisses Petition Filed 53 Years Later

Karnataka High Court Upholds B...

Supreme Court Upholds Prisoners' Right to Legal Aid in Landmark Ruling

Supreme Court Upholds Prisoner...

Supreme Court’s Verdict in Lalta Prasad Vaish & Sons vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Supreme Court’s Verdict in L...

Supreme Court Upholds Pay Structure for Artificers in Indian Navy

Supreme Court Upholds Pay Stru...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against HDFC Bank in Locker Operation Dispute

Supreme Court Quashes FIR Agai...

Supreme Court Ruling on Corporate Insolvency Proceedings: Vidyasagar Prasad vs UCO Bank

Supreme Court Ruling on Corpor...

Supreme Court Ruling on Yashodeep Bisanrao Vadode's Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court Ruling on Yashod...

Supreme Court Resolves Lease Dispute between Central Warehousing Corporation and Sidhartha Tiles

Supreme Court Resolves Lease D...