Karan Madaan vs State
2019 Latest Caselaw 2206 Del

$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                  Judgment delivered on: 26.04.2019
+      BAIL APPLN. 2092/2017
KARAN MADAAN                                          ..... Petitioner
                          versus
STATE                                                 ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner :      Mr. Imran Khan, Adv.

For the Respondent:       Ms. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                             JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.181 of 2017 under Sections 354/506/509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station Inderpuri.

2. The allegations in the FIR are that the prosecutrix along with her friend had gone to meet the uncle of the petitioner. When they entered the house, petitioner is alleged to have come out in an intoxicated state and assaulted her. It is alleged that he pushed her and hit her on her chest and abused her.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has been falsely implicated and there is an unexplained delay for over five months in lodging the complaint.

4. By order dated 17.10.2017, petitioner was granted interim protection subject to joining of the investigation.

5. Learned Addl. PP submits that petitioner has joined the investigation. Investigation is complete and there is no further requirement of the petitioner to join the investigation.

6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view of the totality of the facts and circumstances, 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 petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- 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.

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

9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J APRIL 26, 2019/'rs'