ANSHUL MALIK Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail u/s 438 Cr.P.C.in case FIR No.1219/2017 registered under Sections 376/328 IPC at Police Station Vijay Vihar. Status report is not on record.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Petitioner's counsel urged that false allegations have been levelled against the petitioner by the prosecutrix to extort money. He further contended that there is huge delay in lodging the FIR by the prosecutrix. During this period, attempt was made by the prosecutrix through her counsel to extract money from him to settle the issue. Transcript of the conversation with the counsel has been placed on record. He further urged that the petitioner had filed a complaint against the prosecutrix and her counsel but no action was taken by the police. The petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation.

(3.) On perusal of the record, it reveals that the petitioner had filed anticipatory bail applications earlier also. In the petition, the petitioner disclosed about dismissal of the earlier anticipatory bail application No.2456/2017 by this Court on 30.11.2017 (Annexure '9'). It is pertinent to note that thereafter, again the petitioner had filed another bail application No.517/2018 to seek anticipatory bail before this Court and it came to be dismissed on 07.02018. Apparently, the petitioner has suppressed / concealed this material fact regarding dismissal of his second bail application on 07.02018. There is no change of circumstances to consider the third anticipatory bail application moved by the petitioner somewhat on similar grounds. The petitioner has not joined the investigation and non-bailable warrants have been issued against him.