AMIT SHUKLA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 438 read with Section 482 of the Cr.PC for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.51/2008 lodged under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered with Police Station: Crime against Women Cell, Nanakpura, New Delhi.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner states that after lodging of the aforesaid FIR by the complainant, Ms. Richa Shukla, (wife of the petitioner) against her husband, the petitioner and the members of his family on 05.08.2008, a petition for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the petitioner in this Court, registered as BAIL APPLN. 2276/2008, was allowed vide order dated 28.10.2009 on the conditions as laid down in the said order. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that in the present case, charge-sheet was filed on 12.05.2010, whereunder it was opined that as per the documents on the record, offence under Section 313 IPC was not attracted. However, the offences under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC were found to be attracted. Vide order dated 16.07.2010, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate arrived at a conclusion that the commission of offence under Section 313 Cr.PC was also disclosed from the charge-sheet and cognizance of the aforesaid offence was taken and summons were issued to the accused persons, including the petitioner herein. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred a revision petition, which was disposed of vide order dated 21.12.2010 on the point of maintainability. It is stated that now the matter is to be committed to the Sessions Court.

(3.) HAVING regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present petition is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of '50,000/-, with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/SHO. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not leave the country without the prior permission of the trial court nor shall he interfere with or try to influence any witness. It is further clarified that the payment of '2.5 lacs that the petitioner has offered to pay to the complainant is without prejudice to his rights and contention, and the same shall be paid by him to the complainant in two equal installments of '1.25 lacs each within a period of six weeks.