Delhi High Court
Pooja Duggal vs The State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 5 December, 2018
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 05.12.2018
+ BAIL APPLN. 167/2018
POOJA DUGGAL ..... Petitioner
versus
THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitender Tanwar, Advocate
For the Respondent : Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State with ASI Ram
Kishan
Mr. O.P. Panwar, Adv. for complainant
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
05.12.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
BAIL APPLN. 167/2018
1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.315/2017 under Sections
420/406/34 IPC, Police Station Mehrauli.
2. It is alleged in the FIR by the complainant that in the year 2013,
there was an Agreement entered into by him with the petitioner for
purchase of a particular flat. It is contended that he has paid Rs.7 lakhs
pursuant to the Agreement, however, later on, it transpired that the property
has been sold to someone else by the proposed sellers.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that even as per the
allegations in the FIR, the petitioner is alleged to have only witnessed the
said transaction. Further, it is contended that the transaction is of year 2013
and the complaint has been lodged after four years.
4. Learned counsel submits that as on date, even assuming some money
was paid, the right to recover has lapsed by prescription. He further submits
that nature of the allegation is purely civil.
5. The petitioner was granted interim protection by order dated
22.01.2018, subject to joining investigation.
6. Learned Addl. PP, under instructions from the Investigating Officer,
submits that the petitioner did join investigation as and when were required
by the Investigating Officer.
7. Parties were thereafter referred to mediation by order dated
11.09.2018. Settlement agreement dated 25.10.2018 has been entered into
between the parties before Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation
Centre.
8. Parties are present in person in Court. They confirm that the
disputes have been settled.
9. Settlement agreement records the terms of settlement in the
following manner:
"a) The first party has acknowledged and admitted the liability of
Rs.7,00.000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Only) and has accordingly
agreed to pay back the entire principal sum of Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees
Seven Lakhs Only) to the complainant / second party Mr.
Dharmender Mahto in full and final settlement of all the claims of
the second party / complainant in the following manner:-
i) Out of Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Only) the
first party shall pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- on or
before 30.06.2019.
ii) The first party shall further pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-
(Rupees Three Lakhs Only) on or before 31.12.2019.
iii) The first party shall pay the balance amount of Rs.
1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) on or before
28.02.2020.
b) In case, the first party fails to pay the aforesaid
settlement mount in the manner as stated above, the first
party shall be further liable to pay interest on, the due
amount @ 12% p.a. w.e.f. 01.01.2019 and/or 01.07.2019
and/or 01.01.2020 in accordance with the manner described
in 6(a) (i); 6(a) (ii) and 6(a) (iii) respectively, as the case may
be, to the actual date of payment.
c) The second party / complainant shall not object to the
grant of bail to the first party by the Hon'ble High Court of
Delhi in the present Bail Application No. 167/2018 relating
FIR No. 315/2017 u/s 420/406/34 IPG registered with P.S.
Mehrauli, Delhi.
d) The parties have agreed to give a copy of the present
Settlement Agreement to the Investigating Officer in FIR No.
315/2017 u/s 420/406/34 IPG registered with P.8. Mehrauli,
Delhi for necessary and appropriate action in accordance
with the law."
10. Petitioner who is present in person in Court submits that she shall
make the payments in terms of the agreement/as per the schedule agreed
upon.
11. Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant submits that in view
of the settlement, he does not oppose the application for grant of bail.
12. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with the directions
that, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail on his
furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating
Officer/SHO concerned.
13. The petitioner shall not do anything which may prejudice either the
prosecution witnesses or the trial. The petitioner shall not leave the country
without the permission of the Trial Court. The petitioner shall not
endeavour to contact either the complainant or his family.
14. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of in the above terms.
15. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
DECEMBER 05, 2018
'rs'
