Vipra Sharma v. State Of NCT Of Delhi
$~60 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 1938/2019 VIPRA SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Rakesh Malhotra, Adv.
versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through:
Ms Kusum Dhalla, APP for State.
SI Kanahiya Lal, P.S. New Friends Colony.
Mr. Jatin Sehgal and Mr. Adhinath Singh, Advs. for R2/Complainant. s
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
O R D E R
% 25.11.2019 1.
The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.34/2019, under Sections 323/451/452/506/341/509/354/120-B/34 of the IPC, registered with Police Station New Friends Colony.
2.
The said FIR was registered at the instance of the complainant (mother-in-law of the petitioner). The complainant had alleged that the petitioner, along with her mother, Prabha Sharma, and her father, Om Prakash Sharma, some other friends and family members had entered her house and forcefully looted cash, jewellery and other expensive items. They had also threatened to kill the complainant's son when they protested. It is alleged that one of the persons (husband of the petitioner's sister) had also
tried to outrage her modesty. She stated that on 18.8.2018 she had gone out for some important work and when she came back, she found that her almirah was open and jewellery and other expensive items were stolen. She checked the CCTV footage and found that her daughter-in-law, (petitioner herein) had taken away the said items in a handbag. She made a complaint to the police by dialling 100. She also alleged that the petitioner had got her son arrested on false allegations.
She states that later at night, at about 12:30-3:30 AM, the petitioner along with ten to twelve friends and relatives, including her father and mother, forcibly entered her house and took away the jewellery, camera, hand watches and other items, which they loaded in a truck. Her son was also brought by the police to her house. When he tried to stop the said persons, they threatened to kill him. 3.
The complainant also stated that the transcript of the conversation indicates that a conspiracy was hatched between the petitioner, her mother and other persons to falsely implicate the complainant's son and their family members.
4.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the petitioner is trying to resolve all disputes with the complainant and the matter is pending before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.
5.
The learned counsel for the petitioner further states she is fully cooperating with the Investigating officer and she has also voluntarily agreed to provide her voice samples, which are scheduled to be taken on 16th and 17th of January, 2020.
6.
In view of the above, this Court considers it apposite to allow the
present petition.
7.
The petitioner is granted anticipatory bail on furnishing a person bond of ₹25,000/- and one surety of an equivalent amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
The petitioner shall also provide her mobile number and ensure that she is reachable at all times. 8.
It is clarified that the Investigating Officer is at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail if the petitioner fails to cooperate in the investigation. It is further clarified that this order will inure to the benefit of the petitioner till a charge-sheet is filed.
9.
The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. VIBHU BAKHRU, J NOVEMBER 25, 2019 DR