KAPIL SETHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitions challenge the order dated 13 th October, 2011 whereby the Petitioner Kapil Sethi was granted anticipatory bail subject to certain conditions. The grievance of the Petitioner Kapil Sethi is that while granting anticipatory bail, he has been directed to fulfill the onerous condition of placing on record the FDR in the sum of Rs. 15 lakhs in the name of the learned District and Sessions Judge, subject to the final outcome of the cases qua the claim of the Complainant about her jewellary articles being in custody of Kapil Sethi.

(2.) The grievance of the Petitioner Komal Sethi, the Complainant against the impugned order is that by the impugned order Kapil Sethi has been permitted to travel to USA because of which he is likely to flee from justice which would cause irreparable damage to the process of law underway between the two Petitioners in the different proceedings going on before different Courts.

(3.) Briefly the facts leading to passing of the impugned order are that the parties were married on 28 th September, 2006 whereafter they left for USA. The Petitioners could not live compatibly resulting in Komal Sethi filing a complaint with the Crime against Women Cell in January 2010 consequently FIR No. 114/2010 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC was registered at PS CAW Cell, Nanakpura, Delhi. Despite notice being issued, the Petitioner Kapil Sethi did not join the inquiry and thus on 21 st May, 2011 on an application filed by Kapil Sethi for anticipatory bail, the learned Additional Sessions Judge directed the Petitioners to appear in person on 2 nd June, 2011. Though the Petitioner Kapil Sethi offered that he would like to resolve through mediation however, it appears that no efforts were made by him to resolve the disputes. In fact, it was the grievance of the Complainant Komal Sethi before the learned Additional Sessions Judge that in the garb of trying to resolve the matter Kapil Sethi was buying time and he had come to the country only for the purpose that he could get his visa extended. The learned Trial Court while permitting the Petitioner Kapil Sethi to withdraw the application permitted the parties to approach the Mediator for mediation at any of the mediation centre of their choice. The custody of the passport was however, directed to be taken by the Investigating Officer after one week vide order dated 13 th June, 2011. Challenging the said order the Petitioner Kapil Sethi filed a Crl. Misc Case No. 2018/2011 before this Court seeking protection. This Court while disposing of the petition on 15 th June, 2011 directed Kapil Sethi to join the investigation, deposit the passport with the CAW cell permitting him to get the visa stamped on the passport within seven days, directing him not to leave the country without the permission of the Court and in the event of arrest to be given a seven days notice. The said petition was disposed of with these directions with the consent of the parties.