Sh. Apaar Bansal vs State

Delhi High Court

Sh. Apaar Bansal vs State on 18 March, 2019

$~4

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                               Judgment delivered on: 18.03.2019
+       BAIL APPLN. 3028/2018
        SH. APAAR BANSAL                             ..... Petitioner

                                 versus
        STATE                                        ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner :      Mr.R.D.Singh, Advocate.

For the Respondent:       Mr.Hirein Sharma, APP for the State
                          with SI Jitender, P.S.K.N.Katju Marg.
                          Mr.Sumit Chaudhary, Adv.for the complainant.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                            JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.388/2017 under Sections 498A/406/34/354A/377 IPG, Police Station K.N. Katju Marg.

2. Petitioner is the husband of the complainant. On 20.12.2018 parties had sought reference to mediation. Petitioner was granted interim protection subject to joining investigation and also attending mediation.

3. Parties have arrived at a settlement and Settlement Agreement BAIL APPLN.3028/2018 Page 1 of 2 dated 16.03.2019 has been executed. Learned counsel for the parties submits that parties have settled the disputes and agreed to remain bound by the settlement terms.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/complainant submits that subject to petitioner complying with the terms and conditions of the settlement, she has no objection to the petitioner being admitting to bail.

5. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view the fact that parties have settled their disputes, I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the arresting officer/IO/SHO shall release the petitioner on bail on his furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Investigating Officer/SHO concerned. Petitioner shall not do anything which may prejudice either the investigation, trial or the prosecution witnesses.

6. Petition is allowed in the above terms.

7. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MARCH 18, 2019/rk BAIL APPLN.3028/2018 Page 2 of 2