New Delhi, Aug 7 (PTI) A court here Monday rejected the bail plea of a man accused of being part of a seven-member gang that posed as income tax officers, conducted a fake raid and threatened the family of the victim to part with money in order to settle the matter.

While dismissing the bail application, the court questioned the Delhi police's rationale behind not invoking the relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including dacoity. It also observed the alleged offences were “rampant nowadays and highly harmful to the society at large.”

Also Read | Nuh Anti-Encroachment Drive: Punjab and Haryana High Court Stays Demolition, Seeks Detail of Action.

Metropolitan Magistrate Bharti Beniwal was hearing the bail plea of Ravinder Kumar against whom Janakpuri police had registered an FIR under IPC sections 385 (putting person in fear of injury in order to commit extortion) and 452 (house trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint).

According to the FIR, while conducting the “fake raid" the accused seized the mobile phones of the complainant's family members and tried to extort money from them. The CCTV footage showed one of the accused was in Delhi police uniform, it said.

Also Read | 'Modi Ji... I Am a Bigger Fakir Than You', Rajasthan CM Ashok Gehlot Takes Jibe at PM Narendra Modi (Watch Video).

Before the complainant could reach home, the accused had left, the FIR said.

“Contents of the complaint and FIR clearly show the commission of the offences of dacoity and other serious offences. It is not apparent why the Delhi police have not invoked the relevant sections…,” the court said.

Noting the evidence before it, including CCTV footage, the court said it was not a simple case of extortion.

“It is a case where extortion has become robbery. Here, the offenders…attempted/committed extortion by putting those persons (in fear) of instant wrongful restraint…And since seven persons conjointly attempted to commit a robbery, it becomes a case of dacoity,” the court said.

It said merely because the relevant IPC sections were not invoked, it did not “absolve the court from considering the totality of the facts".

“The court cannot be a silent spectator while considering the present bail application. In the present case, the allegations against the accused/applicant are grave and serious in nature and it cannot be inferred from the sections invoked by the investigating agency that the same are not serious in nature,” the magistrate said.

Rejecting the argument of Kumar's counsel that bail could be granted on grounds of parity as two other co-accused had got the relief, the court said, while applying the principle of parity, the court cannot exercise its power in a “capricious manner” and it had to consider the “totality of circumstances".

“Offences alleged to have been committed by the accused are rampant nowadays and they are highly harmful to the society at large. These offences are committed with a calculative motive and a deep understanding of their consequences…,” the court said.

The magistrate said courts had to strike a balance between the interest of society in general and the right of the accused to personal liberty.

“This court is of the opinion that admitting the accused on bail may hamper the investigation and the possibility of him influencing or threatening the witnesses or chances of absconding cannot be ruled out,” the magistrate said.

“Considering the totality of facts and circumstances including the seriousness of the offences and its ramifications, I do not deem it fit to allow the instant application. Consequently, the bail application stands dismissed,” the magistrate added.

(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)