Varsha vs The State (N.C.T. Of Delhi)
2019 Latest Caselaw 1568 Del

$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                     Judgment delivered on: 18.03.2019
+        BAIL APPLN. 1502/2018

         VARSHA                                             ..... Petitioner
                                     versus

         THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI)                ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner :         Mr. M.K.Perwez, Advocate.

For the Respondent:          Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State
                             with SI Sandeep Singh, PS DIU/RD.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                                JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No. 25/2018 under Sections 354/354(A)/379/506/323/34 of the IPC, Police Station Prashant Vihar, Delhi.

2. The allegations in the FIR are that the complainant who is an Advocate had appeared before the mediation centre, representing her client, who had brought his children for the purpose of mediation. It is alleged that at the time of the mediation proceedings, the wife of her client along with her associates including the petitioner tried to snatch the children and she when tried to prevent the same, was assaulted. It is also alleged that a gold chain was snatched from her possession by the wife of her client.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has

been falsely implicated and there are no allegations in the FIR qua the petitioner and she has not even been named in the FIR. Further it is contended that the gold chain, as per the averments in the FIR, was snatched by the wife of the client of the complainant.

4. By order dated 03.07.2018, petitioner was granted protection subject to petitioner joining investigation.

5. Learned APP under instructions submits that the petitioner did join investigation, investigation is nearly complete and charge sheet is in the process of being finalised for being filed in the Court. He submits that there is further requirement of the petitioner to join investigation.

6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances, I am satisfied that petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. 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. 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 which may prejudice either the investigation, trial or the prosecution witnesses.

7. Petition is allowed in the above terms.

8. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

MARCH 18, 2019/rk                                SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J