SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Atul Jindal vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 24 July, 2018

$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 24.07.2018

+ BAIL APPLN.1439/2018
ATUL JINDAL ….. Petitioner
versus

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ….. Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr. Pramod Pandey, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, APP for the State with SI
Sumit, PS Sarai Rohilla
Mr.Anuj Arora, Adv. for the respondent.

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

JUDGMENT

24.07.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.427/2017 IPC under
Sections 498A/306/34 IPC at Police station Sarai Rohilla.

2. The FIR has been registered on the complaint of the sister of
the deceased. It is contended that the petitioner, who was the husband
of the deceased, had physically neglected her on account of which the
deceased committed suicide. Alleged suicide note has been recovered
by the investigating agency wherein the deceased is inter alia alleged

BAIL APPLN.1439/2018 Page 1 of 3
to have written that the petitioner did not give her anything physically
or emotionally.

3. Reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the
complainant on the statement of the sisters recorded under section 161
Cr.P.C. wherein they have also stated that the deceased had
complained to them that the petitioner had physically neglected the
deceased.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated. He submits that there is no allegation that
the petitioner ever fought with the deceased or treated her with
cruelty. The only allegation is that she has been physically neglected.
He submits that the same does not amount to cruelty of a nature which
could lead an ordinary prudent person to commit suicide. It is
submitted that there is also no instigation alleged on the part of the
petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is
no allegation against the petitioner of ever having demanded any
dowry or money from the deceased or her family.

6. Petitioner had been in custody since 11.11.2017. Investigation
has been complete and charge-sheet has already been filed.

BAIL APPLN.1439/2018 Page 2 of 3

7. Without commenting upon the merits of the case and on perusal
of the record, I am of the view that the petitioner has made out a case
for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, on petitioner furnishing a bail
bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to
the satisfaction of the Trial Court, petitioner shall be released on bail,
if not required in any other case.

8. The petitioner shall not do anything, which may either
prejudice the trial or the prosecution witnesses. The petitioner shall
not leave the country without the prior permission of the Trial Court.

9. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

10. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JULY 24, 2018
ns

BAIL APPLN.1439/2018 Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation