Delhi High Court
Rukhsana vs Nawab Ali & Anr. on 25 February, 2015
Author: Sunil Gaur
$~68
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: February 25, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. 4530/2014
RUKHSANA ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Prabha Sharma, Advocate
versus
NAWAB ALI & ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Karan Singh, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with ASI Bani Singh
Mr. Rajesh Raina, Advocate for
respondent No.2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
Respondent-accused was granted pre-arrest bail in FIR
No.152/2013 under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC registered at P.S.
Jamia Nagar, Delhi in view of the Memorandum of Understanding
executed on 25th January, 2014. Since respondent-accused did not comply
with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding, petitioner-
complainant had sought cancellation of pre-arrest bail granted to
respondent-accused, which was declined vide impugned order of 5th
August, 2014.
Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order and the
CRL.M.C. 4530/2014 Page 1
material on record, I find that respondent-accused cannot wriggle out of
the Memorandum of Understanding on the pretext that it was under the
pressure of his counsel and the other counsel, who had been infact
engaged by complainant.
It appears from the impugned order that respondent-accused had
volunteered to give a sum of `18,000/- to petitioner-complainant, which
she had refused. Respondent-accused claims that he is diabetic and has
become totally blind and is thus unable to honour the Memorandum of
Understanding.
During the course of hearing, it was disclosed that when the
Memorandum of Understanding was executed, respondent-accused was
blind even then also and was out of job due to his blindness. In such a
situation, it is not acceptable that the Memorandum of Understanding was
executed by respondent-accused under some duress.
In view of aforesaid, order of 25th January, 2014 granting pre-arrest
bail to respondent-accused on the basis of Memorandum of
Understanding is hereby quashed.
Since it is undertaken on behalf of respondent-accused that a sum
of `20,000/- would be deposited with the trial court within a week from
today, therefore, it is deemed appropriate to permit respondent-accused to
seek pre-arrest bail on merits before the Sessions Court within two weeks
from today. Subject to respondent-accused depositing a sum of `20,000/-
with the trial court and applying for pre-arrest bail on merits before
Sessions Court within two weeks, respondent-accused be not arrested in
this FIR case till his application for pre-arrest bail is decided by Sessions
Court on merits. Needless to say, accused-respondent's fresh application
CRL.M.C. 4530/2014 Page 2
for pre-arrest bail be decided on merits without taking into consideration
the aforesaid Memorandum of Understanding or the deposit of `20,000/-
with trial court.
With aforesaid directions, this petition is disposed of.
Copy of this order be given dasti to learned counsel for the parties.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 25, 2015
s
CRL.M.C. 4530/2014 Page 3
