Anil Mittal v. The State

$~5 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 485/2018 ANIL MITTAL ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Gopesh Tripathy, Adv.

versus THE STATE ..... Respondent Through Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 13.11.2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that disputes arose between the petitioner and complainant on a business transaction. In the FIR, complainant did not state that petitioner had touched her breast. FIR was initially registered under Sections 323/341/506/34 IPC. Subsequently, in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., complainant improved her version resulting in addition of Section 354 IPC in the FIR. Keeping in mind the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, petitioner is admitted to bail, subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of `20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Bail application is disposed of in the above terms. Dasti.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

NOVEMBER 13, 2018 r.bararia