Tushar Jain v. State of NCT of Delhi

Delhi High Court · 14 Dec 2022 · 2022:DHC:5825
Dinesh Kumar Sharma
BAIL APPLN. 802/2021
2022:DHC:5825
criminal appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in a Section 376 IPC case after chargesheet filing, emphasizing discretionary factors and imposing conditions to safeguard the investigation.

Full Text
Translation output
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005825
BAIL APPLN. 802/2021
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 802/2021
TUSHAR JAIN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Prashant Sharma, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Sahni, APP for the State with SI Prathibha Yadav, PS Adarsh
Nagar.
Date of Decision: 14th December, 2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
JUDGMENT
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J.
(Oral)

1. This is an application for anticipatory bail in the case of FIR No.506/2020, Police Station Adarsh Nagar under Section 376 IPC.

2. At the outset, Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submits that the present application for anticipatory bail may be treated as an application for regular bail since the chargesheet has been filed.

3. The facts of this case are peculiar in nature. FIR was lodged on the statement of the complainant Ms. AA alleging that the applicant established a physical relationship with her on the false pretext of marriage. Admittedly, after the lodging of the FIR, the marriage between the VERMA complainant/prosecutrix and the petitioner/accused had taken place and the parties lived as husband and wife for some time. However, matrimonial disputes arose and now both parties have taken divorce by mutual consent.

4. The grant of bail requires the consideration of various factors which ultimately depends upon the specific facts and circumstances of the case before the Court. There is no straight jacket formula which can ever be prescribed as to what the relevant factors could be. However, certain important factors that are always considered, inter alia, relate to prima facie involvement of the accused, nature and gravity of the charge, severity of the punishment, and the character, position and standing of the accused Reliance can be placed on State of U.P. v. Amarmani Tripathi: (2005) 8 SCC 21.

5. In the present case, the petitioner/accused was never arrested by the Investigating agency. After the investigation, the chargesheet was filed and the case is at the stage of PE. It is also pertinent to note that the petitioner/accused is enjoying interim protection from this Court.

6. I consider that in the totality of the facts and circumstances, in event of arrest, the petitioner/applicant be admitted to regular bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court subject to the following conditions: a) the Applicant shall under no circumstances leave India without prior intimation of the Court concerned; VERMA b) the Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case; c) the Applicant shall provide his/her mobile number(s) to the Investigating Officer and keep it operational at all times; d) In case of a change of residential address and/or mobile number, the Applicant shall intimate the same to the Investigating Officer/ Court concerned by way of an affidavit.

7. The bail application stands disposed of in the above terms.

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J DECEMBER 14, 2022 VERMA