DR. NARENDER KUMAR INDRA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition that has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 438 dated 03.09.2017 under Sections 376, 377, 420, 468 and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Rai, Sonipat, District Sonipat.

(2.) It is contended that the petitioner herein has been falsely implicated in the said FIR and in fact no offence under the aforesaid Sections can be made out against the petitioner herein. It is argued that the FIR does not disclose the fact that the father of the complainant was well aware of the fact that the petitioner herein was earlier married as would be evident from Annexure P-1, a letter addressed to him as far back as 12.06.1997. It is further argued that the complainant knew about the pendency of the divorce petition prior to their solemnizing a marriage on 03.02.3017. In fact, the WhatsApp messages dated 08.04.2016 would reflect that she was following the divorce proceedings as she questioned the petitioner as to why a long date had been given by the Court. It is also argued that her parents knew about their relationship as would be evident from the WhatsApp messages dated 12.07.2016 in which the complainant had written "My parents advices me to not to disclose about you to anyone, But...I invited everyone at my home and declared my relationship with you." It is also argued that the complainant has implied in the FIR that she came to know the petitioner only in November, 2016, which fact is belied from the WhatsApp messages, as well as from the fact that the complainant and her parents had travelled to Nepal together in August, 2015.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant submits that the petitioner who has been arrested ought not to be released on regular bail since there is an apprehension that he would threaten and influence the witnesses. In this regard, Dr.Anmol Rattan Singh learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant draws attention of this Court to various e-mails and letters that have been addressed by the father of the complainant, as a senior citizen, seeking protection of life and liberty for himself and his family members from Dr. Narender Kumar Indra (petitioner herein) and his associates. In the said letter an apprehension has been expressed that the petitioner herein would harm/kidnap or kill the complainant's father. It is also argued that the offence under Sections 376 and 494 IPC are made out. It is submitted that the petitioner did not disclose the fact that divorce had not been granted to him before soleminaztion of his marriage.