IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI BAIL APPLN. 1075/2015. versus CORAM: HON BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

Similar documents
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL.M.C. No. 233/2014 Date of decision: 14th February, 2014.

IN THE COURT OF KUSHAL SINGLA, PCS. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE Ist CLASS, CHANDIGARH.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : WILD LIFE PROTECTION ACT, BAIL APPLN. No.1626/2009. Judgment reserved on :20th October, 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl.M.C. 3710/2007. Date of decision: February 06, 2009.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision: WP(C) No. 416 of 2011 and CM Nos /2011. Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgement delivered on: 2 nd December, CRL.M.C. 2392/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL.REV.P. 76/2009 Reserved on: 30th April, 2012 Decided on: 11th July, 2012

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + ARB.A. 5/2015 & IA 2340/2015 (for stay) versus

versus Through Mr. Saleem Ahmed, ASC for the State with SI Ravi Kumar. Mr. Surender Singh, Adv. for R-2.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINA PROCEDURE. CRL.REV.P. 523/2009 & Crl. M.A. No /2009(Stay)

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 48/2015 Date of decision:

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 19 th September, CM(M) 592/2016. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3603/2015 & Crl.M.A.12792/2015 Reserved on: Date of decision:

$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: 30 th July, CRL.M.C. No.2836/2015. Versus

STANDING ORDER NO. 330/2008

CORAM : HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE P.P. BHATT. For the Appellant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI TR.P.(CRL.) 42/2015 & CRL.M.A.13562/2015 & CRL.M.A /2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CRIMINAL M.C. NO.3015 OF 2012 Decided on : 4th January, 2013

1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes

Through: Mr. Rohit Sharma with Mr. Amarjeet Singh, Advocates

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 997/2014. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI

.. IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI:AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. I.A. No /2006 in C.S.(OS) No.795/2004

Bar and Bench (

...Applicant/Petitioner Through : Mr. P.N.Lekhi,Sr. Advocate With Mr. Ajay Aggarwal and Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocates

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CRL.L.P. 316/2013 DATE OF DECISION :

ITEM NO.12 COURT NO.2 SECTION IIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA. CRIMINAL PETITION No.7191/2015

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS OF State of Tamil Nadu.Appellant.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT. Date of Decision: CRL.A of 2013.

$~51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment delivered on: 20 th October, 2015

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MEGHALAYA: MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

21. $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment Delivered on:

... Respondent Ms.Fizani Husain, APP. 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus... Respondent Through Mr.Pawan Bahl, APP AND. Bail Appl. No. 92/2007 Mohd.

order imposes the following restrictions on the petitioner:-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE: THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.PACHHAPURE. CRIMINAL PETITION No.7626 OF 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 CRL.M.C. 4102/2011 Judgment delivered on:9th December, 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER. Judgment delivered on: WP (C) 4642/2008

$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment delivered on:10 th September, 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI I.A. No of 2014 with I.A. No. 175 of 2011 in Cr.Appeal (D.B.) No. 904 of 2008

LAW AREA NAME : WOMAN SECTION NAME : SPECIAL LAWS SUB SECTION NAME : DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT LAW IN BRIEF

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NDPS ACT. Judgment reserved on :11th November, Judgment delivered on: 06th February, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE W.P.(C) 6034/2013 DATE OF DECISION :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL. CRIMINAL PETITION No /2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. W.P. Crl. No. 1029/2010. Decided on: 9th August, 2011.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of Decision: CRL.A. 121/2010

Bail Application No. 459; 460 & 461 State Vs 1 Jyoti 2 Sunita 3 Pooja FIR No.778/15 U/s 323/341/354/34 IPC PS Adarsh Nagar

Reserved on: 3 rd February, 2010 Pronounced on: 4 th February, 2010

Judgment reserved on: November 22, 2010 Judgment delivered on: November 24, Through: Mr. Tarun Rana, Advocate

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW. Execution Application No. 154 of Tuesday, the 21 st day August, 2018

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus P.V. KANAKARAJ TRADING AS. Through None. % Date of Decision : 05 th December, 2017

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT ( THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH )

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4158/2015 Date of Decision : January 08 th, versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment Pronounced on: versus -...Respondent

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : UNAUTHORISED CONSTRUCTION. W.P.(C) 1972/2011 and CMs 4189/2011, 4729/2011, 12216/2011

2. Heard Sri Bhola Singh Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rishad Murtza, learned Government Advocate.

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) WP(C) No. 2145/1999

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 932 OF 2016 (Arising out SLP (Crl.) No.

Rumi Dhar vs State Of West Bengal & Anr on 8 April, 2009 REPORTABLE. State of West Bengal and another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR INJUNCTION Date of Judgment: RSA No.55/2009 & CM No.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2019 MANTRI CASTLES PVT. LTD & ANR. WITH

- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.

Versus. 1. M/s Skyhigh Infraland Pvt.Ltd., SCO No.5, First Floor, HUDA Shopping Complex, Sector 8, Karnal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl. M.C. No. 377/2010 & Crl. M.A. 1296/2010. Reserved on:18th May, 2011

Bar & Bench (

$~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: July 24, W.P.(C) 7444/2018, C.M. APPL. No /2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P.No of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Reserved on: 5th August, Date of decision: 19th September, 2011

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 297 OF 2004 IN EXECUTION PETITION NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 826 of 2010

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: M/S MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA P. LTD Petitioner.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Crl. Rev. P. No.286/2009

CONTEMPT APPLICATION No. 09 OF Ram Gopal Sharma. Applicant. Versus. Sh Sanjay Mitra IAS (WB:82), Defence Secretary, 101-A, South

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Date of Order: August 30 th, Bail Appln. No.1943/2009 %

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO OF

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI FIRST APPEAL NO. 469 OF 2011

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION SUO MOTU CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO.1 OF 2017 IN RE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.S.

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision: 29 th March, LPA No.777/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. CRL M C 656/2005 and CRL M A 2217/2005. Reserved on: January 17, Date of decision: February 8, 2008

$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Date of Decision: 12th November, 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 35 OF 1984.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1177/2012. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH. Appellant(s) VERSUS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1374 OF 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE EX.P. 419/2008 Date of Decision: 05th February, 2013.

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. % Date of Decision: 9 th February, J U D G M E N T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Date of decision: 17th July, 2013 RFA 383/2012. Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BORDER SECURITY FORCE ACT, 1968 Date of Decision: W.P.(C) No.

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(COMM) Nos.421/2016 & 424/2016. % 28 th November, M/s VYSYA LEASING & FINANCE LTD.

Transcription:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI NAVEEN RANA STATE Date of decision: 23 rd September, 2015 BAIL APPLN. 1075/2015... Petitioner Through Mr. Rohit Kalyan, Mr.Kanan Sharma and Mr. Siddharth Sanewal, Advocates along with the petitioner in person. versus... Respondent Through Mr.Rajat Katyal, APP. SI Ajay Kumar, P.S.Nangloi. Mr.RN.Sharma, counsel for the complainant along with the complainant in person. CORAM: HON BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) 1. The present is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for pre-arrest bail in BAIL APPLN 1075./2015 Page 1 of 5

F.I.R.No.770/2014 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Nangloi, Delhi. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant/wife lodged a complaint, which has resulted in the subject F.I.R., alleging cruelty and dowry demand against the applicant/husband. It was alleged that the applicant/husband who is working as a constable in the Delhi Police had demanded an i10 car and other dowry articles. It is alleged that the stridhan belonging to the complainant including jewellery gifted to her by her parents has also been retained by the applicant/husband. 3. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, West, vide order dated 25 th May, 2015 dismissed the application for anticipatory bail filed on behalf of the applicant, inter-alia on the grounds that the allegations leveled against the applicant/husband are serious in nature and the articles of dowry have not yet been recovered. 4. Mr. Rajat Katyal, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State submits that pursuant to the order passed by this court on 29 th May, 2015, the applicant/husband has joined investigation. BAIL APPLN 1075./2015 Page 2 of 5

5. In the present case it is observed that the applicant/husband has a clean record and is not wanted in any other case. The applicant/husband has joined investigation and has been cooperating with the police since the date of the order passed by this court granting him interim protection. 6. The only ground on which the applicant s prayer for pre-arrest bail is opposed is that the stridhan belonging to the complainant/wife is still in his possession. 7. There is no gainsaying the fact that the proceedings under Section 498A/406 IPC are not meant for the recovery of jewellery and dowry articles. The applicant/husband cannot be denied bail only on the ground that his release would render the recovery of jewellery and other dowry articles difficult. The complainant/wife can, if she so chooses, move the Civil Court for recovery of articles. Ref: ( Jagdish Thakkar vs. State of Delhi, reported as 1993 JCC 117) and (Deepak Kumar and Anr. vs. State, reported as 2008 (3) Crimes 447 (Del.) BAIL APPLN 1075./2015 Page 3 of 5

8. There is yet another aspect which has to be considered at this stage. The applicant/husband and the complainant/wife have a two year old son, namely, Manvik. The applicant/husband who is present in-person states that he is willing to deposit a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- (rupees eight lakh) in the account of Master Manvik, in the following instalments:- i) Rs.4,00,000/- (rupees four lakh) within two weeks from today; ii) Remaining amount of Rs.4,00,000/- (rupees four lakh) within two months thereafter. 9. Counsel for the applicant/husband on instructions from the applicant states that cheques in this behalf shall be handed over to counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant/wife, in the present application. 10. The applicant/husband also undertakes to return the i10 car bearing Registration No. DL2CM8352. The possession of the same be given to the complainant/wife within a period of two weeks from today. BAIL APPLN 1075./2015 Page 4 of 5

11. Insofar as the jewellery is concerned it is the case of the applicant/husband that the complainant/wife took it away with her while leaving her matrimonial home. 12. In view of the foregoing, the present bail application is allowed. In the event of his arrest the applicant/husband shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Station House In-charge/Officer of the concerned Police Station; subject to the further condition that he shall comply with the directions given by this Court in regard to the undertaking given by him in his Court. He shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for questioning as and when called upon by the concerned Police Officer. 13. The Bail Application is disposed of accordingly. 14. Dasti. SEPTEMBER 23, 2015 bp SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J BAIL APPLN 1075./2015 Page 5 of 5