Delhi High Court
Vimmi Puri vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 6 April, 2018
$~8 to 11
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 06.04.2018
+ BAIL APPLN. 1735/2017
VIMMI PURI ..... Petitioner
Versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
+ BAIL APPLN. 1738/2017
SUNIL CHOPRA ..... Petitioner
Versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
+ BAIL APPLN. 1740/2017
SAHIL PURI ..... Petitioner
Versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
+ BAIL APPLN. 1742/2017
SANJEEV PURI ..... Petitioner
Versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. K.K. Manan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ankush
Narang & Ms. Shivani Kant
For the Respondent : Mr Akshai Malik, Addl. PP for the State
SI Ajay Kumar, PS Kirti Nagar
BAIL APPLN. 1735/2017, 1738/2017, 1740/2017, 1742/2017 Page 1 of 3
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
06.04.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.133/2016 under
Sections 420/406/34 IPC, Police Station Kirti Nagar.
2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner contends that the
petitioners have been falsely implicated. Subject complaint was initiated as
a counter blast to the proceedings under Section 138 Negotiable
Instruments Act initiated by the Petitioner against the complainant.
3. It is submitted that the allegation that jewellery was handed over by
the complainant to the petitioner on assurance that a rental income would
be given to the respondents against the said jewellery is false and fabricated
and not substantiated. In fact the entire allegations are to create a false
defence to the complainant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument
Act.
4. By order dated 08.09.2017 interim protection was granted to the
petitioners subject to their joining investigation.
5. Learned APP under instructions of the Investigating Officer submits
that the petitioners joined investigation as and when were called upon by
the Investigating Officer. He submits that investigation is complete and
Final Report is under process of being filed.
6. In the status report filed by the State it is inter alia stated:
"In this regard, investigation was conducted, during course
of investigation, complainant joined investigation and notice
under Section 91 Cr.P.C. was given for producing jewellery
bills and other related documents, out of which jewellery
bills of worth Rs. 25 lacs were provided by the complainant,
which could not be verified from concerned jewellers as there
was no jewellery shop found at given address. However no
written agreement was made at the time of delivery of
jewellery as per statement of complainant."
7. Without commenting on the merits of the case, perusal of record
shows that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of Anticipatory Bail.
Further, no case is made out for custodial interrogation.
8. In the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the petitioners shall be
released on bail by the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer/SHO, on
petitioners furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting
Officer/Investigating Officer/SHO.
9. The petitioners shall not do anything, which shall prejudice either
the investigation or the prosecution witnesses.
10. Petitions are disposed of in the above terms.
11. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
APRIL 06, 2018/ns
