Inderjeet Yadav v. The State
Signed By:RAM DATT Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.
$~8&9 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 2349/2018 SURENDER Petitioner Represented by: Mr. P.K. Sharma, Adv.
versus THE STATE Represented by:
Respondent Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with SI Nisha PS Patel Nagar.
Mr. Sanjeev Manchanda, Mr. Harish Chawla, Advs. for complainant.
+ BAIL APPLN. 2351/2018 INDERJEETYADAV Represented by:
Petitioner Mr. P.K. Sharma, Adv.
versus THE STATE Represented by:
Respondent Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with SI Nisha PS Patel Nagar.
Mr. Sanjeev Manchanda, Mr. Harish Chawla, Advs. for complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
ORDER
% 27.02.2019 By these petitions the petitioners seek anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 161/2018 under Sections 323/341/448/354B/506/509/34 IPG and Section 8 & 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short POCSO Act) at PS Patel Nagar.
BAIL APPLN. 2349/2018 & BAIL APPLN. 2351/2018
A status report has been filed. As per the status report on 2"' June, 2018 two PCR calls were recorded at PS Pafel Nagar and the caller was saying that the entry is not being allowed to the premises. On reaching the spot wall of the house was found broken and some persons were abusing each other. The complainant stated that she would give her complaint on the next date. On the next date a hand-written complaint was received wherein it is alleged that the complainant along with her family and small children visited their house bearing No. 2126/3 Gali No.4. Prem Nagar, Delhi. When they tried to enter the room, the two petitioners came and threatened them. It is alleged that Inderjeet caught her hand and pushed her breast. Further Surender lifted her daughter who was 9 year old, kissed her and threatened her. The complainant also alleged that the shirt of her 9 year old daughter was torn.
Statement of the daughter of the complainant was also recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she corroborated the version. Considering the nature of allegations, this Court finds no ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Petitions are dismissed.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
FEBRUARY 27, 2019 'ga'
BAIL APPLN. 2349/2018 & BAIL APPLN. 2351/2018