MUKESH GUPTA Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide this order, I shall dispose of an anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner Mukesh Goel @ Mukesh Kumar Gupta under section 438 Cr.P.C. in FIR No. 541/18 u/s. 380 IPC, PS Narela, Delhi.

(2.) Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail on the ground that petitioner is innocent and is being falsely implicated in the present FIR. The petitioner had taken on rent the ground floor of the premises no. A-136, DSIIDC, Narela Industrial Park, Delhi-110040 from the complainant for running factory. The complainant is a Charted Accountant. The petitioner was his tenant for about 3 years 7 months w.e.f. 01st July, 2014. Lease-deed has expired on 30.11.2017. Since the complainant was demanding revision of rent, the applicant did not renew the lease and vacated the premises in the January, 2018 and handed over the possession to the complainant. After vacating the premises, the applicant had demanded return of security amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-. However, the complainant did not clear the same on one pretext or the another. The complainant has lodged the false first complaint on 27.03.2018 and further complaint to DCP on 02.04.2018 against the petitioner. Perusal of these complaints reveal that complainant was not aware about the exact items being stolen from his premises even after six days of theft. The first complaint dated 27.05.2018 did not contain any allegations of theft of articles and did not disclose commission of offence.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that complainant has improved its complaint dated 02.04.2010 by making oral statement to the IO, on 10.04.2018 and had added new facts. The complainant had further added facts and improved his oral statement made to IO on 25.07.2018. The complainant has nothing to do with the basement. The basement was rented and possessed by one tenant Mr. Ankur Bansal and the petitioner had no access to the same.