Mumbai, February 11, 2022 – Irshad Mohd. Adil Khan, accused of rape and cheating, has been denied bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai. Additional Sessions Judge Sanjashree J. Gharat rejected Khan’s bail application (Bail Application No. 99 of 2022), citing the ongoing investigation and the seriousness of the offenses.

Khan was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 759 of 2021, registered at Agripada Police Station, for offenses punishable under sections 376(2)(n) (repeated rape), 406 (criminal breach of trust), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Prosecution’s Case:

The prosecution alleged that the complainant, who married in September 2020, met Khan on Instagram. Khan allegedly insisted on meeting her, took her to a hotel in Sakinaka, and forcibly had sexual intercourse with her under the threat of disclosing their meeting to her husband. Subsequently, he allegedly demanded and received gold ornaments worth ₹3,20,000 from her, promising to return them. He then allegedly continued to have sexual intercourse with her under the pretext of returning the ornaments. When he failed to return the ornaments, the complainant disclosed the incident to her in-laws and filed a complaint.

Defense Arguments:

Khan’s advocate, Dhaval Sangoi, argued that his client was falsely implicated. He claimed that the FIR was filed after the complainant’s extramarital affair with Khan was revealed to her husband and that there was a year-long delay in filing the complaint. He also argued that the allegation of taking gold ornaments worth ₹3,20,000 was fabricated. He emphasized that the complainant’s statement under section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) had been recorded, and a substantial part of the investigation was complete.

Prosecution’s Objections:

The Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), Kalpana Hire, opposed the bail, arguing that the investigation was still in progress and that granting bail would lead to witness tampering and threats to the victim and witnesses.

Court’s Decision:

Judge Gharat noted that Khan had previously filed a bail application (Criminal Bail Application No. 3112 of 2021), which was rejected. She emphasized that there was no change in circumstances since the previous rejection, as the investigation was still ongoing. She stated that the mere recording of the complainant’s statement under section 164 of Cr.P.C. did not constitute a change in circumstances warranting a second bail application on the same grounds.

The court highlighted the seriousness of the offenses, including repeated rape and cheating. It also noted that the recovery of the gold ornaments was still pending.

Considering the ongoing investigation and the seriousness of the offenses, the court concluded that Khan’s bail application could not be allowed.

Key Points from the Court’s Reasoning:

• Ongoing Investigation: The court emphasized that the investigation was still in progress.
• No Change in Circumstances: The court found no significant change in circumstances since the previous rejection of Khan’s bail application.
• Seriousness of Offenses: The court highlighted the gravity of the rape and cheating allegations.
• Pending Recovery: The court noted that the recovery of the gold ornaments was still pending.
• Potential for Tampering: The court expressed concerns about potential witness tampering and threats to the victim.

Conclusion:

The court rejected Khan’s bail application, emphasizing the ongoing investigation and the seriousness of the offenses.