Gautam Verma v. State Of NCT Delhi

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 44/2014 GAUTAM VERMA ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Dharam Dev, Adv with petitioner in person.

versus STATE OF NCT DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by:

Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, APP for State with SI Laxman, PS Janak Puri.

Mr. Hemant Malhotra, Adv. for complainant with complainant in person .

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 28.07.2016 By the present petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 471/2013 under Sections 406/498A/34 IPC registered at PS Janakpuri.

The allegations against the petitioner in the FIR are harassment for demand of dowry coupled with physical and mental torture. It is alleged that one day her husband in conspiracy with her in-laws shifted her to a rented house intending to leave her alone there and finally on 7th August, 2013 he left her with the child alone in the rented accommodation and went back to his family.

The parties were referred to Mediation Centre however no settlement could be arrived at between the parties. Proceedings are pending before the BAIL APPLN. 44/2014

Family Court, however in the interregnum period the petitioner is paying maintenance of `10,000/- to the complainant for her and the child. Learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions from the petitioner states that the petitioner will continue to pay maintenance of `10,000/- for the complainant and the child Kavyaan, subject to orders passed by Family Court. On instructions from petitioner learned counsel further submits that to show his bonafide, the petitioner will deposit a sum of `5 lakhs by way of FDR with the Registrar General of this Court which will be ultimately utilized for the minor child. The FDR of `5 lakhs so deposited by the petitioner will be subject to final orders to be passed by the Family Court while settling the issues between the parties.

On the petitioner depositing a sum of `5 lakhs by way of FDR with the Registrar General of this Court within four weeks as per the undertaking noted above and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It is therefore directed that the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of `25000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/SHO concerned, further subject to the petitioner joining the investigating as and when directed and will not leave the Country without prior permission of the learned Trial Court. Petition is disposed of.

Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

JULY 28, 2016/'vkm'

BAIL APPLN. 44/2014