Sharvan Kumar v. State NCT of Delhi

ORDER %

31.07.2013

¶1The present petitions have been filed by the petitioners under Section 438 read with Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. praying inter alia for grant of anticipatory ball in case FIR No.200/2013 registered under Sections 376/506/34 IPC at PS Vasant Kunj (N), Delhi.

¶2Counsel for the petitioners states that the complainant happens to be the sister-in-law of the petitioners in Bail Applications No.1362/2013 and 1363/2013 and the sister-in-law of the sister of the petitioner In Ball Application No.1367/2013. He states that the BailApplicationsNo.1362/2013, 1363/2013 &1367/2013 complainant had got married to the youngest brother of the petitioners, Babu Singh and i^Ir. Jatan Pal Singh, ten years ago and all the parties have been residing in a common premises owned by the mother of the parties, Smt. Santosh Devi. He submits that there exists a family dispute in respect of the aforesaid property and the present complaint is only an offshoot of the said dispute lodged in order to falsely implicate the petitioners. He submits that his clients are ready and willing to participate in the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer.

¶3Learned APR for the State submits that investigation in the present matter is being conducted and the complainant has admitted in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that there is a dispute with regard to the aforesaid immovable property due to which she was upset and had therefore lodged the present FIR. He further states that the complainant was requested to undergo a medical examination, but she had declined to do so. In support of the aforesaid submissions, he hands over some documents produced by the 10 that have been perused by the Court.

¶4In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it is directed that in the event of their arrest, the petitioners shall be BailApplicationsNo.1362/2013,1363/2013&1367/2013 Page2 of3 ./ released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ?25,00P/- each with one surety each in the like annount, to the satisfaction of the investigating officer/arresting officer. Needless to state that the petitioners shall fully cooperate in the investigation and will not create any hindrance or impediment during the course of investigation.

¶5The petitions are disposed of. DASTI. HIMA KOHLI, J JULY 31, 2013 sk/rkb BanApplicationsNo.1362/2013,1363/2013&1367/2013 Page3 of3

-V 28, 29 & 33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAILAPPLN. 1362/2013, BAILAPPLN. 1363/2013 and BAILAPPLN.1367/2013 JATAN PAL SINGH Petitioner BABU SINGH Petitioner SHARVAN KUMAR Petitioner Tiirough : i^r, l^adan Lai, Advocate versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Respondent Tiirough : IMr. Naveen Sharma, APP for State with 10. Complainant in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI