Vikram Sodhi v. State

$~40 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 672/2017 VIKRAM SODHI ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Aman Lekhi, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Gurpreet Singh, Advocate.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.Mukesh Kumar, APP for State with SI Rajpal, P.S. Uttam Nagar, Delhi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA

O R D E R

% 18.04.2017 Crl.M.A.No.6205/2017 (Exemption) Exemption granted, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of.

BAIL APPLN. 672/2017 and Crl.M.(B) 673/2017 This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the petitioner Vikram Sodhi for grant of bail in case FIR No.569/2016, under Sections 315/494/506 IPC registered at Police Station Uttam Nagar, Delhi. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the present petitioner got married with the complainant Sharin Kapoor. Learned senior counsel further submits that after the marriage differences between

the two families had arisen which resulted into registration of FIR No.569/2016, under Sections 315/494/506 IPC at Police Station Uttam Nagar, Delhi against the petitioner. He further submits that so far as the allegation under Section 315 IPC is concerned, it is totally false as it was the complainant who mischievously in order to save her falsehood dignified life put a false plea qua against the present petitioner. Learned senior counsel further submits that the factum of this is very much evident from the writ petition i.e. Crl.Misc.No.M-38731/2015 filed by the complainant before the Punjab and Haryana High Court on 10th November, 2015 regarding receiving of threat by the relatives of the complainant. Learned senior counsel further submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 3rd July, 2017 and is not required for further investigation and further submits that no purpose would be served if the petitioner is kept in judicial custody for further period and prays that the petitioner may be released on regular bail.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the present bail application moved on behalf of the petitioner is devoid of any merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State and perused the record.

Looking into the above facts and circumstances, since the petitioner is in judicial custody since 3rd July, 2017 and the petitioner is not required for further investigation, I admit the petitioner on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned ASJ/MM, with the condition that he shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned Court and shall

not make any telephonic call to the complainant or visit the house of the complainant and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. The present bail application is allowed and stands disposed of. Copy of this order be given dasti, as prayed. I.S.MEHTA, J APRIL 18, 2017 'dc'