Deepak Uppal v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi

$~1 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 78/2018 & Crl.M.A. 577/2018 DEEPAK UPPAL ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, Adv.

Versus

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. K.S. Ahuja, APP for the State with SI Raghu Kumar, PS North Rohini, Delhi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

O R D E R

% 26.10.2018 Allegations have been made in FIR no. 241/2017 of police station North Rohini against the petitioner of he having committed offences punishable under Sections498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

By order dated 11.01.2018, interim protection against arrest was granted to the petitioner.

The said order has continued, it having been extended from time to time.

On the last date of hearing, the petitioner submitted that he is ready to hand over streedhan articles of the complainant to the investigating officer. As per the report submitted, some seizures have

been made. The submissions of the learned additional public prosecutor indicate that the petitioner has been cooperating with the investigation joining it as and when called or required to do so. Given the background facts, there is no reason why he should be denied the protection of anticipatory bail, the dispute having arisen out of matrimonial feud. Thus, the petition is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the petitioner being arrested, he shall be released on bail by the arresting officer on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety in the like amount subject to the following further conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall continue cooperating with the investigation and join the same as and when called upon to do so; (ii) The petitioner shall not come in contact with or try to influence any of the witnesses connected to the case;

(iii) Prior to his release, he shall give the telephone numbers of self and of at least one other responsible family member besides that of the surety to the investigating officer;

(iv) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

(v) He shall not leave India without the prior permission of the court of cognizance or the trial court, as the case may be, and to ensure due compliance with this condition and shall deposit his passport, if he holds one, with the said court.

This order will inure only till the date of first appearance of the petitioner in the event of a charge-sheet being filed on conclusion of the investigation and process being issued against him by the court of cognizance.

The petition stands disposed of in above terms. Dasti.

R.K.GAUBA, J OCTOBER 26, 2018 nk