Prashant Antil vs State
2018 Latest Caselaw 6410 Del

$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                     Judgment delivered on:23.10.2018

+      BAIL APPLN. 870/2018

       PRASHANT ANTIL                                      ..... Petitioner

                             versus

       STATE                                               ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner :         Mr. Gulab Singh, Advocate.

For the Respondent     :     Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State.
                             ASI Gayatri, PS Bindapur

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                                JUDGMENT

23.10.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.254/2018 under Section 376 IPC, Police Station Bindapur.

2. The allegations against the petitioner are that the petitioner made physical relationship with the prosecutrix on the false promise to marry.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and it is a case of petitioner having been trapped for the purposes of extortion. Petitioner has relied on an audio conversation, wherein, it is alleged that there is a demand made by the prosecutrix of Rs.2 lakhs, failing which, the petitioner is threatened to be falsely implicated.

4. Petitioner was granted interim protection by order dated 20.04.2018 subject to the joining investigation.

5. Learned APP for the State submits that the petitioner did join investigation and the investigation is complete and chargesheet has been filed.

6. Without commenting on the merits of the case, and on perusal of the records, I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the arresting officer/IO/SHO shall release the petitioner on bail on his furnishing a bail 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 concerned. Petitioner shall not do anything that may prejudice either the trial or the prosecution witnesses. Petitioner shall not contact the prosecutrix. Petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the Trial Court.

8. The Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master

OCTOBER 23, 2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J st