Gaurav Joshi @ Gaurav Kumar v. State

12#$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 444/2016 GAURAV JOSHI @ GAURAV KUMAR ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. R.K. Bachchan, Advocate.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by:

Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State with Inspector Jai Bhagwan, PS M.S. Park.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 29.08.2016 1.

By the present petition the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 504/205 under Sections 366/376/506 IPC registered at PS Mansarovar Park, Delhi.

2.

The allegations against the petitioner are that both the petitioner and the complainant were friendly with each other and used to have discussions while studying in the college. On 5th October, 2013 the petitioner proposed to marry the complainant and took her to a DDA flat at Mansarovar Park where he established physical relationship with her contrary to her wishes. Later the petitioner took the complainant to a temple also but did not perform the marriage. It is also alleged that the petitioner used to threaten the complainant that in case she would lodge a FIR he would finish her family.

BAIL APPLN. 444/2016

3.

A perusal of the record reveals that after the alleged incident dated 5th October, 2013 the parties entered into a settlement dated 7th January, 2015 copy of which document is at Page-23 of the paper-book wherein the complainant admits being in relationship with the petitioner for the last three years and that at that moment they should be thinking of their future and at the relevant time they will consider about marriage. The above noted FIR was got registered on 20th October, 2015.

4.

Learned APP for the State on instructions from the Investigating Officer submits that the complainant does not dispute her signatures on the document dated 17th January, 2015 and that the petitioner has joined the investigation.

5.

Considering the document dated 7th January, 2015 at page -23 of the paper-book and the fact that the petitioner has joined the investigation, I deem it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It is, therefore, directed that in the event of arrest the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of `25,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/SHO concerned, further subject to the condition that he will join the investigation as and when directed by the Investigating Officer and will not leave the country without prior permission of the learned Trial Court.

6.

Petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

AUGUST 29, 2016/'vn'

BAIL APPLN. 444/2016