A Delhi court has rejected the bail plea of a 26-year-old man accused of sexually assaulting, abusing and threatening his former partner, observing that the case involves serious allegations supported by prima facie material. The court noted that the investigation is still underway and releasing the accused at this stage could impact the process.
The matter was heard by Additional Sessions Judge Hargurvarinder Singh Jaggi, who refused relief to the accused, Saksham Kaushik, booked under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The court underlined that the complainant’s statements and available material indicate consistency and require careful examination during trial.
Allegations point to pattern of abuse
According to the prosecution, the accused first approached the complainant in January and gradually imposed control over her movements. The situation escalated over the following weeks, with allegations of confinement, physical assault and repeated sexual abuse.
The complainant alleged that the accused threatened to circulate private videos to silence her. She also claimed that he assaulted her on multiple occasions, including incidents where she was taken to another city and subjected to violence. The court noted that such allegations, if proven, point to a pattern of coercion and intimidation.
Court flags risk of evidence tampering
While denying bail, the court emphasised that crucial forensic and digital evidence is still being analysed. It was observed that the possibility of the accused influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence cannot be ruled out at this stage. The judge also took note of the prosecution’s argument that the accused maintained control over the complainant through threats and surveillance, which raises concerns about her safety if he is released. The court said such apprehensions are not imaginary, given the nature of the accusations.
Also Read | Biometric voting in India? Supreme Court agrees to examine proposal
Defence claims false implication
The defence argued that the case stemmed from a consensual relationship that later turned sour, alleging that the complaint was motivated. It cited personal chats and documents to support its claim.
Also Read | SC opens door for transwoman to apply for Delhi teaching posts beyond gender categories
However, the court refused to examine these arguments in detail at the bail stage, stating that such issues must be tested during trial. It also observed that the presence of a prior relationship does not negate allegations of non-consensual acts, voyeurism and intimidation. Finding no merit in the plea, the court dismissed the bail application, allowing the investigation to continue.
