Vipin Kumar v. State

$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 330/2018 & Crl. M.A. No.2608/2018 VIPIN KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Parag Chawla, Mr. Sudeep Sudan and Ms. Munindra Dvivedi, Advs.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for the State Complainant in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 12.02.2018 The petitioner is seeking anticipatory protection. FIR has been registered on the complaint of the complainant (present in person). The allegations in the complaint have been perused. A sum of ₹11 lacs is due to the complainant in terms of the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner disputes this amount. His submission is that separate proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has been preferred by the petitioner; the cheque which had been dishonoured was only in the sum of ₹3 lacs but that amount has been enhanced and made to read as ₹13 lacs. Needless to state that this position is not admitted by the complainant.

Be that as it may, on the petitioner's paying a ₹3 lacs to the complainant within a period of one week and on his undertaking that he will join investigation as and when summoned by the Investigating Officer and will fully cooperate with the investigation, the petitioner

be admitted to bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. His latest mobile number and his residential address will be disclosed to the Investigating Officer. Petition disposed of.

Order be given dasti under signatures of the Court Master. INDERMEET KAUR, J FEBRUARY 12, 2018