LAWS(DLH)-2019-8-31

SANDEEP Vs. STATE

Decided On August 08, 2019
SANDEEP Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.605/2018 under Section 381 IPC, Police Station Paschim Vihar.

(2.) Allegations against the petitioner are that petitioner was employed to take care of 18 telecom towers of the service provider to telecom companies. He is alleged to have last attended his office on 14.10.2018. Thereafter when inspection was carried out of the said towers after 2-3 days, it transpired that several battery equipment as well as telecom equipment was missing. Complaint was lodged and the FIR was registered.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that petitioner had asked for a raise in salary and he was asked to fill up a service bond and since he declined to do the same, he was directed to hand over the charge, which he did on 14.10.2018 and subsequently he was implicated in the subject FIR.