Neetu Aggarwal v. State

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + NEETU AGGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Puneet Mittal, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Niranjan Singh and Mr.Rajiv Singh Pilania, Advocates.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State with W/SI S.Khan, PS Subzi Mandi.

Mr.G.L.Soni, Advocate for the complainant.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI

O R D E R

% 02.08.2017 1.

By way of this application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 120/2017, under Sections 376/354(A)/354/354(B)/506 IPC & Section 6 of POCSO Act, registered at PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi.

2.

It has been informed by learned APP for the State that the petitioner has joined the investigation.

3.

Status report has been filed by the State along with some documents including the complaint dated 18th April, 2016 against husband of the petitioner on the letter head of ANANT SHREE SUKHRAMJEE TRUST

addressed to SHO, Subzi Mandi Police Station, Delhi signed by about 50 persons and its current status is not relevant to deal with the application by his wife for release on bail.

4.

Copy of statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 22nd May, 2017 of the complainants 'S' and 'M' (names withheld), who are sisters aged about 17 years and 23 years respectively, have also been filed wherein various incidents since August, 2009 have been narrated and making various allegations against their father.

5.

The petitioner herein is the second wife of the father of the complainants with whom he allegedly married in the year 2012. The main allegation against her is that she used to bring home her male friends and the complainants have seen her with her male friends in indecent condition. There are certain allegations against the male friends and the threat being extended by the petitioner (Step mother) when the complainants informed her that they would tell their father about whatever they had seen. 6.

Taking into consideration that the alleged incident pertained to the year 2012 after the petitioner was brought by the father of the complainants as their step mother, the allegations of being touched are against the alleged male friend of the petitioner and against their father, I find it to be a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. 7.

It is directed that in the event of arrest the Petitioner be released on bail on her furnishing personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- with one surety in the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the I.O/S.H.O. concerned and subject to following conditions:- (i) The petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when

required by the Investigating Officer.

(ii) The petitioner will not contact the witnesses or will try to influence them.

(iii) The Petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the Court.

8.

Application is allowed.

9.

As prayed, copy of the order be also given dasti to learned counsel for the parties.

PRATIBHA RANI, J.

AUGUST 02, 2017 'pg'