Shahjeb v. State

$~9 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 2082/2018 SHAHJEB ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.

Abhishek Sharma and Mr.

Mrigank Shankar, Advs.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Dr. M.P. Singh, APP for State with SI Richa Sharma, P.S. Punjabi Bagh.

Mr. Puneet Rai and Mr. Neeraj Shad, Advs. for Complainant.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 05.10.2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prosecutrix is aged about 25 years. Petitioner was in a relationship with prosecutrix. He never promised to marry the prosecutrix. Prosecutrix had been accompanying the petitioner to various places.

Photographs have been placed on record to show that prosecutrix and petitioner were in a relationship. It is further submitted that after two years their relationship broke off and present FIR has been lodged falsely by the prosecutrix with the allegations that petitioner had established physical relations with her by promising to marry her. Petitioner is in custody for more than one month. Investigations are complete and charge-sheet has been filed.

Therefore, it is prayed that

petitioner be admitted to bail.

Learned APP, on instructions of the Investigating Officer, admits that investigations are complete and charge-sheet has been filed. Keeping in mind the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of `20,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Bail application is disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneous application is disposed of as infructuous.

Dasti.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

OCTOBER 05, 2018 ga