Nitin Goel v. State

$~2 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ NITIN GOEL ..... Petitioner Through:

Ms. Rajdipa Behura, Advocate with Ms. Chandrani Prasad, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with SI Jitender, PS KNK Marg.

Mr. L.S. Solanki, Advocate with Ms. Anu Solanki, Advocate for complainant with complainant in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

O R D E R

% 04.02.2019 The complainant is present with counsel, the submissions made on her behalf being that the petitioner does not deserve release on anticipatory bail given the gravity of the offences involved, the same going beyond matrimonial dispute. At the same time, on being asked the counsel for the complainant submitted that though efforts of this kind had been made earlier before the FIR was lodged, first under the aegis of Delhi Govt. Mediation Centre and thereafter through conciliation process in Crime Against Women Cell, the complainant is still inclined to co-operate with the process of mediation in the hope that some amicable resolution comes up. The counsel for the complainant submitted that the amount which was voluntarily offered to be deposited by the petitioner on 20.12.2018 does not

represent the value of the stridhan and the right to maintenance of which the complainant has been deprived of consistently by the petitioner, he infact keeping himself away failing to abide by the directions of the Metropolitan Magistrate in corresponding proceedings under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner has been facing difficulty in arranging the finances for deposit in terms of the order dated 20.12.2018, he having arranged so far an amount of Rs.6,00,000/-, a term deposit receipt (TDR) in which regard has been prepared in the name of the Registrar General, it having been issued on 02.02.2019 by Oriental Bank of Commerce which he is prepared to deposit in the registry today, he seeking time of another ten days to make similar deposit of the remainder. At the same time, she sought to clarify that the amount of Rs.15,00,000/-, which was offered voluntarily on 20.12.

2018 as a deposit shall be only an amount tentatively arrived, the petitioner being open to discussion to quantify as to how much amount he is obliged to pay to the complainant towards all her claims arising out of dispute, and for this, the parties hopefully would be deliberating on during the process of mediation. The petitioner may deposit the TDR of Rs.6,00,000/- with the registry today, the balance of Rs.9,00,000/- in terms of previous order to be deposited on or before 16.02.2019. The interim protection granted by order dated 20.12.2018 would continue till the next date of hearing, subject to strict compliance with these conditions.

The parties shall appear before the Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre at 3:30 p.m. on 07.02.2019. The petitioner shall co-operate and join investigation as and when called upon to do so during the interregnum.

Further status report shall be filed at the time when the matter is taken up on the next date before the court.

Be listed on 11th March, 2019.

R.K.GAUBA, J.

FEBRUARY 04, 2019 vk