Full Text
Translation output
$-14/15/21/22 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 1282/2019, Crl. M.B. No.926/2019 & Crl.
M.A. no.
, 10968/2019 TUBA ANJUM Petitioner
Through Mr.Shoaib Rider,Mr.Navjot Kumar and Mr.Kulsum Haider,Advs.
BAIL APPLN. 1282/2019, Crl. M.B. No.926/2019 & Crl.
M.A. no.
, 10968/2019 TUBA ANJUM Petitioner
Through Mr.Shoaib Rider,Mr.Navjot Kumar and Mr.Kulsum Haider,Advs.
VERSUS
THE STATE Respondent
Through Mr.Amit Chadha,APP AND
Through Mr.Amit Chadha,APP AND
BAIL APPLN. 1284/2019, Crl. M.B.No.927/2019 & Crl.
M.A. NO. 10973/2019 MOHD.AZHAR Petitioner
Through Mr. Shoaib Hider,Mr.Navjot Kumar
M.A. NO. 10973/2019 MOHD.AZHAR Petitioner
Through Mr. Shoaib Hider,Mr.Navjot Kumar
VERSUS
Through Mr.AmitChadha,APP AND
BAIL APPLN. 1296/2019, Crl. M.B.No.932/2019 & Crl.
M.A. NO. 11024/2019 ZEESHAN AKHTAR Petitioner Tlirough Mr. Shoaib Hider, Mr.Navjot Kumar
2019:DHC:7306
M.A. NO. 11024/2019 ZEESHAN AKHTAR Petitioner Tlirough Mr. Shoaib Hider, Mr.Navjot Kumar
2019:DHC:7306
VERSUS
AND
BAIL APPLN. 1300/2019, Crl. M.B. No. 934/2019 & Crl.
M.A. NO. 11034/2019 FARHAN AKHTAR Petitioner
Through Mr. Shoaib Rider, Mr.Navjot Kumar
M.A. NO. 11034/2019 FARHAN AKHTAR Petitioner
Through Mr. Shoaib Rider, Mr.Navjot Kumar
VERSUS
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K.PATHAK
22.05.2019 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that prosecutrix married co-accused Ruman Akhtar in the year 2014. Their relations became estranged with the passage oftime. Petitioners are brothers and sister ofco- accused Ruman Akhtar. Prosecutrix has roped in the petitioners in order to harass them. The prosecutrix had filed FIR No.338/2016 at police station
Uttam Nagar under Sections 354(A)/323/509/34IPG againsttheir neighbour wherein she stated that she had married co-accused Ruman Akhtar of her own free will, as per Muslim rites. This shows that allegations levelled in the FIR are untrue.
Itis submitted that petitioners were notcalled tojoin the investigation for almost two years. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. prosecutrix hasstatedthatshe did notwishto pursuehercomplaint.
Keeping in mindthe totality offacts and circumstances ofthis case,it is ordered that in case of arrest, petitioners be released on bail subject to their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of^20,000/-(Rupees Twenty
Thousand Only)with one surety each ofthe like amountto the satisfaction oftheInvestigating Officer/Arresting Officer/SHO concerned.
Bail applications are disposed ofin the above terms. Miscellaneous applications are disposed ofasinfructuous.
Dasti.
A.K.PATHAK,J.
MAY 22,2019 r.bararia
22.05.2019 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that prosecutrix married co-accused Ruman Akhtar in the year 2014. Their relations became estranged with the passage oftime. Petitioners are brothers and sister ofco- accused Ruman Akhtar. Prosecutrix has roped in the petitioners in order to harass them. The prosecutrix had filed FIR No.338/2016 at police station
Uttam Nagar under Sections 354(A)/323/509/34IPG againsttheir neighbour wherein she stated that she had married co-accused Ruman Akhtar of her own free will, as per Muslim rites. This shows that allegations levelled in the FIR are untrue.
Itis submitted that petitioners were notcalled tojoin the investigation for almost two years. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. prosecutrix hasstatedthatshe did notwishto pursuehercomplaint.
Keeping in mindthe totality offacts and circumstances ofthis case,it is ordered that in case of arrest, petitioners be released on bail subject to their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of^20,000/-(Rupees Twenty
Thousand Only)with one surety each ofthe like amountto the satisfaction oftheInvestigating Officer/Arresting Officer/SHO concerned.
Bail applications are disposed ofin the above terms. Miscellaneous applications are disposed ofasinfructuous.
Dasti.
A.K.PATHAK,J.
MAY 22,2019 r.bararia
JUDGMENT