SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ankit Rathore vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi on 19 November, 2018

$~16
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment delivered on: 19.11.2018

+ BAIL APPLN. 2399/2018
ANKIT RATHORE ….. Petitioner

versus

THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ….. Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Raj Kumar,
Advocate.

For the Respondent : Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State.

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

JUDGMENT

19.11.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.30/2018 under Sections
498A/304B/34 IPC, Police Station Gandhi Nagar. The petitioner is
the husband of the deceased.

2. The allegations against the petitioner in the FIR are that the
petitioner and his family used to harass the deceased for not bringing
enough dowry and for giving birth to two girls.

3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner

BAIL APPLN. 2399/2018 Page 1 of 3
has been falsely implicated. He submits that the allegations are vague
and there is no instance of demand of dowry mentioned in either of
the statements given by the family members. Learned senior counsel
further submits that on the contrary petitioner had advanced a loan of
approximately Rs.7 lakhs for the marriage of the sister of his wife
which was subsequently repaid by his father-in-law. He submits that
there is no instance mentioned at all of any dowry every having been
demanded or paid to the petitioner or his family.

4. Learned senior counsel further contends that the allegations
initially were that petitioner was having an affair and wanted to kill
his wife which was also not substantiated from the record and charge
sheet has been filed only under Section 498A and 304B IPC as
investigation did not reveal any such offence having been committed.
He submits that there is improvement in the version of the
prosecution.

5. The petitioner has been in custody since 29.01.2018.

6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and on perusal of
the record as well as the statement of the witnesses recorded under
Section 161 Cr.P.C, who have not yet deposed before the Trial Court,
I am satisfied that petitioner has made out a case for grant of regular
bail.

7. Accordingly, on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of

BAIL APPLN. 2399/2018 Page 2 of 3
Rs.50,000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the
satisfaction of the Trial Court, petitioner shall be released on bail, if
not required in any other case. Petitioner shall not do anything which
may prejudice the trial or the prosecution witnesses. Petitioner shall
not leave the country without the permission of the Trial Court.

8. Petition is allowed in the above terms.

9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
NOVEMBER 19, 2018
rk

BAIL APPLN. 2399/2018 Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh