← Library
High Court of DelhiBAIL APPLN./2252/2016

Pawan Kumar v. State

2017-01-27Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Mukta Gupta2 pages

$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 2252/2016 PAWAN KUMAR ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Yogendra K Verma, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by:

Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the State with SI Sumitra, PS Rajouri Garden

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 27.01.2017 By the present petitioner, petitioner seeks bail in case FIR No.1105/2015 under Sections 384/376-D/506/IPC and Section 6 of POSCO Act registered at PS Rajouri Garden.

Above noted FIR was registered on the complaint of father of the prosecutrix who alleged that one day he found that money was missing and he suspected his wife. On 10th July, 2015 again ₹24,000/- was missing from the almirah and he threatened his family that he will commit suicide. The daughter of the complainant, who is aged 16 years, told the complainant that the petitioner, who was living in neighbour, took money from her by showing a pistol. The complainant in the statement stated that his daughter told him that in July 2013 the petitioner established physical relations with her which were videographed and the petitioner used to extort money from her.

Pursuant to the complaint of the complainant, charge sheet was filed and during the course of trial, both the prosecutrix and her father (complainant) have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and since the petitioner is in custody for nearly 1 year and 5 months, material witnesses have already been examined and trial is likely to take some time, this court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner. It is, therefore, directed that petitioner be realised on bail on his furnishing personal bail bond in the sum of ₹25,000/- with one surety in the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, further subject to the condition that the petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial court. Petition is accordingly disposed of.

Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

JANUARY 27, 2017 'sm'