Delhi High Court
Sonu @ Kuldeep vs State ( Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 28 November, 2018
$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 28.11.2018
+ BAIL APPLN. 627/2018
SONU @ KULDEEP ..... Petitioner
versus
STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. M.L. Yadav, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State.
SI Anu, PS Mansarovar Park.
Ms. Anu Narula, Advocate for the complainant.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
28.11.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.446/2017
under Sections 376/354-D/506/34 IPC, Police Station Man Sarovar
Park based on a settlement between the complainant and the brother
of the petitioner, a co-accused and the Settlement Deed dated
01.03.2018 has been executed. Consequent to the settlement, the
complainant has married the brother of the petitioner.
2. The petitioner was granted interim protection by order dated
21.03.2018 subject to joining investigation.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that the
brother of the petitioner has married the complainant solely for the
purposes of obtaining bail. She submits that the brother of the
petitioner has married the complainant and she had appeared before
this court and had consented to grant of anticipatory bail on the very
first date. However, subsequently, the conduct of the brother of the
petitioner had shown that the marriage was solely for the purposes of
obtaining an order from this Court.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
brother of the petitioner has genuinely married the complainant and
the petitioner has been falsely implicated.
5. Learned APP for the State submits that the chargesheet has
already been filed, however, as there was an interim protection by this
Court, chargesheet has been filed without arrest.
6. Keeping in view of the fact that the chargesheet has been filed,
the petitioner is directed to approach the Trial Court for grant of
regular bail within a period of one week from today. The interim
protection, granted to the petitioner, by order dated 21.03.2018, shall
enure to the benefit of the petitioner till the disposal of the application
for grant of regular bail by the Trial Court and in case, the Trial Court
is inclined not to admit the petitioner to bail for a period of one week
thereafter.
7. It is further clarified that in case the petitioner fails to file an
application seeking regular bail within one week from today, the
interim protection granted to the petitioner shall automatically lapse.
8. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall be at liberty to consider
the application without being influenced by anything stated in this
order.
9. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.
10. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
NOVEMBER 28, 2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
st
