Delhi court denies bail to man posing as Army officer who deceived woman into relationship

Delhi court denies bail to man posing as Army officer who deceived woman into relationship

New Delhi, A Delhi court has rejected the bail plea of a man who impersonated a high-ranking Army official to deceive a woman into a relationship, observing that the relationship did not arise out of free and informed consent, and granting bail in such a case undermines its gravity.

Delhi court denies bail to man posing as Army officer who deceived woman into relationship

Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Kumar Gautam dismissed the bail application filed by the accused in a case under Section 77 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 66E and 67 of the Information Technology Act.

According to the prosecution, the accused concealed his real identity and deliberately impersonated a Lieutenant Colonel in the Indian Army to gain the trust of the complainant. He induced the complainant into a relationship and obtained her private photographs on the false pretext of marriage.

The accused circulated these private photographs with third persons, including the complainant's acquaintances, when she refused to continue the relationship.

The defence counsel argued that the accused had been languishing in judicial custody since February 6. He also argued that the matter arose out of a consensual relationship between the accused and the complainant that eventually turned sour due to personal and monetary disputes.

The prosecution's counsel argued that incriminating material had been gathered from the mobile phones of the complainant and other persons that had been seized and sent for forensic examination. He also highlighted that a similar bail application pertaining to the case had been dismissed by a separate magisterial court on March 20 and no substantial change in circumstances was noted thereafter.

"The contention of the applicant that the relationship was consensual cannot be accepted at this stage in view of the allegations of deception and subsequent exploitation. The conduct of the accused, particularly the alleged act of circulating private photographs, reflects a serious abuse of trust and prima facie establishes culpability.

"The gravity of the offence, coupled with the manner in which it has been committed, disentitles the applicant from the discretionary relief of bail," said the court in an order dated April 6.

The court noted that the relationship between the accused and the complainant was induced by misrepresentation and concealment of material facts, such as his identity and marital status, meaning it was not based on free and informed consent.

"At the outset, it is observed that the present case is not a simple case of a failed consensual relationship. The allegations reflect a calculated act of deception, inducement and subsequent exploitation," the court observed.

The court junked the defence counsel's argument that the case was filed for monetary recovery over a personal dispute, considering the material collected during the investigation corroborates the prosecution's story.

"Circulation of private photographs without consent is a serious offence affecting the dignity and privacy of an individual and cannot be trivialised as a mere fallout of a failed relationship," said the court, adding that the actions of the accused reveal a clear intent to exploit and harass the complainant.

"This court is of the considered opinion that granting bail in such circumstances may send a wrong signal and undermine the seriousness of offences involving violation of privacy and dignity," the court observed, dismissing the bail application.

This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.