Ekta Gupta vs Manish Bhatnagar & Ors.
2011 Latest Caselaw 1035 Del

          *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


                                             Date of Reserve: 8th February 2011

                             Date of Order: February 21, 2011

                               + Crl. MC No. 1912/2010
%                                                                        21.02.2011
         Ekta Gupta                                      ...Petitioner

         Versus

         Manish Bhatnagar & Ors.                                ...Respondents

Counsels:

Mr. K.L. Rajora for petitioners.
Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP for State/respondent.
Mr. S. Chakroborty, Advocate

         JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

1.       Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2.       To be referred to the reporter or not?

3.       Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?


                                        ORDER

1. This application for cancellation of bail of the respondents has been

preferred by the petitioner. The respondents are involved in a case under

Section 498A/406/34 IPC.

2. It is apparent from the record that after registration of the FIR, the parties

had entered into a compromise for obtaining divorce by mutual consent and also

for quashing of the FIR. First a motion for divorce by mutual consent was to be

filed and later on a petition for quashing of FIR was to be moved and then moving

of Second Motion for divorce was to take place. However, after compromise,

Crl. MC 1912/2010 Page 1 Of 2 again differences and disputes arose between the parties. Neither the FIR was

got quashed nor divorce by mutual consent materialized. Under this backdrop,

the wife filed this application for cancellation of bail alleging that bail was granted

to the respondent in view of compromise since respondent has backed out from

compromise, his bail should be cancelled.

3. I consider that there is no valid ground to cancel the bail. The allegations

that the husband was not agreeing for quashing of FIR and for divorce by mutual

consent, cannot be a ground for denying bail. The cancellation of bail cannot be

used as a tool to pressurize the husband or his family members. The petition is

hereby dismissed.

February 21, 2011                              SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J
rd




Crl. MC 1912/2010                                                      Page 2 Of 2