Dinesh Tanwar v. State Of NCT Of Delhi

$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 453/2016 DINESH TANWAR ..... Petitioner Through Mr Atul Sharma, Adv.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr Hirein Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 04.03.2016 Vide this application under Section 438 of Cr.PC, the petitioner seeks transit anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 19/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Jodhpur East, Rajasthan to enable him to exhaust his remedy before the competent court at Jodhpur, Rajasthan. Notice.

Mr Hirein Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State accepts notice. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner received a notice dated 17.02.2016 in case FIR No. 19/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Jodhpur East, Rajasthan for appearance in Police Station Mahila Thana, District East, Jodhpur, Rajasthan before the concerned Investigating Officer of the case. However, the petitioner is unable to appear before the Investigating Officer of the case due to the fact that he is Vice-Principal in Sangli Max School at Mandi House, New Delhi. The examination has started from 19.02.2016 and will conclude on 28.03.2016.

During examination period, it is difficult for the petitioner to leave Delhi as such he may be granted time to seek appropriate remedy before the Court of competent jurisdiction till 28.03.2016. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State objects to grant of any relief to the petitioner on the ground that for the purpose of filing anticipatory bail application, the presence of the petitioner is not required and in case any such relief is granted, he may be granted three days time to approach the Court of competent jurisdiction.

As per the copy of the FIR placed on record Ms. Hem Lata, wife of the petitioner, has lodged a complaint with the police regarding the harassment meted out to her on account of dowry by the petitioner and his every family member. Under the circumstances, I directed that the petitioner, in the event of arrest, shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer. It is, however, made clear that this order shall operate for a period of ten days from today and during this period the petitioner may move appropriate application before the Court at Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

The application stands disposed of accordingly. A copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the petitioner. SUNITA GUPTA, J MARCH 04, 2016/rd