High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/2011/2016

Anjali Kumari & ANR v. The State (Govt Of NCT Of Delhi) & ORS

2016-08-09Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vipin Sanghi2 pages

$~7.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2011/2016 ANJALI KUMARI & ANR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Lokesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate versus THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Advocate for Mr.

Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

O R D E R

% 09.08.2016 The report in relation to petitioner No. 1 has been received from AIIMS in terms of the order dated 15.07.2016. As per the said report, the medical board consisting of 7 doctors have opined that the age of the petitioner No. 1 Anjali Kumari wife of Sh. Krishan Mohan daughter of Sh. Rakesh Chaudhary is about 20 years as on the date of examination i.e. 22.07.2016. This being the position, since the petitioner No. 1 claims to have married petitioner No.2 and she states that she wishes to reside with him, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are directed to provide such protection to her as considered necessary upon review of the threat perception to the petitioners from respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and other family members of

petitioner No. 1.

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that on the complaint of respondent Nos. 4 and 5, the FIR has been registered at Police Station Nanpur vide FIR No. 150/2016 under Sections 363/366A/34 IPC. In fact, the investigating officer has placed before this Court a communication dated 27.07.2016 addressed to the DIG, Muzaffarpur, with copies marked to other officials wherefrom it is gathered that the aforesaid FIR has been registered. The respondent No.3 is, therefore, directed to communicate to the respondent No. 6 as per the amended memo of parties the medical report received from AIIMS as aforesaid as also a copy of this order for their intimation.

It shall be open to the petitioners to take appropriate steps in relation to the aforesaid FIR before the competent court. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioners may be granted transit bail against their arrest for a period of four weeks so as to enable them to take appropriate steps in respect of the aforesaid proceedings in Bihar. The said prayer is allowed. Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested for a period of four weeks.

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Dasti.

VIPIN SANGHI, J AUGUST 09, 2016 sl