KAPIL KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been filed by the petitioners under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.371/2016, under Sections 308/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Madhu Vihar, New Delhi,.

(2.) The prosecution's case is registered on the statement one Gauri.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has filed a bail application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge which was dismissed vide order dated 28.07.2016. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the present dispute is a matrimonial one and the petitioner is neither a family member nor a relative of the complainant's in-laws, but is merely a friend of main accused Sumit and Amit. More so, no specific role has been assigned to the petitioner except the general allegation to the effect that complainant's husband and their friends Kapil, Rahul Shukla and Manish reached the spot with danda and hockey stick and they started beating the complainant. It is further contended on behalf of the petitioner that father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant were granted anticipatory bail on 30.06.2016. Likewise, the main accused Amit Kumar, Sumit Kumar and Sunil Kumar have already been released on regular bail vide order of learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 13.07.2016 and 18.07.2016 respectively. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended the present dispute is a matrimonial dispute wherein complainant and her relatives are on one side and the main accused , i.e. husband and her in-laws on the other side and there is every likelihood of amicable settlement between them.