Kamal Solanki v. State Of NCT Of Delhi

10# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 448/2017 and Crl. M.A. No. 4192/2017 (interim bail) KAMAL SOLANKI ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Sanjay Madan, Advocate.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by:

Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the State with SI Brahm Pal Singh, PS Malviya Nagar.

Ms. Amrita Chatterjee, Advocate for the complainant.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 08.05.2017 1.

By the present petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.2078/2015 under Sections 448/380/34 IPC registered at PS Malviya Nagar, Delhi.

2.

The allegations in the complaint are pursuant to a matrimonial dispute between Sandeep Pachori and Sheetal Solanki, cousin of the present petitioner. The above noted FIR was lodged by Kailash Chanad, father in law of Sheetal Solanki who alleged that on 25th October, 2014 Sheetal had gone to her parental home and he had already disowned his son and daughter-in-law from his movable and immovable properties because the relations between his son and daughter-in-law were not cordial and from the last one year, his son was residing separately in a rented accommodation. BAIL APPLN. 448/2017

3.

It is further alleged that on 2nd November, 2015 he had locked his house and had gone to the house of his brother along with his wife and younger son. On 13th November, 2015 he was informed by his neighbours that Sheetal Solanki along with family members i.e. mother Sunita, maternal uncle Raju Neniwal, brother Honey Solanki and cousin Kamal Solanki had trespassed into their house, broke the locks and took away costly articles and documents.

4.

Sheetal Solanki was arrested and kept in custody in the above noted FIR whereas similarly placed co-accused Sunita, Raju and Honey have already been granted anticipatory bail.

5.

The role of Kamal Solanki is also at par with Sunita, Raju and Honey, hence this Court deems 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 not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned court and in case of change of address the same will be intimated to the court concerned. 6.

Petition and the application are disposed of. 7.

Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

MAY 08, 2017 'vn'

BAIL APPLN. 448/2017