Bhavik Jani v. State (NCT of Delhi)

1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR 203 of 2018 under Section 406 of the IPC registered at Police Station Amar Colony, New Delhi.

2. The allegations against the petitioner are that the petitioner had represented to the respondent that he was an employee of Apple Company and convinced the respondent that he would purchase Apple Mobile Phone at discounted rates for him. Respondent is alleged to have given Rs. 1,30,000/- to the petitioner. Thereafter petitioner has failed to either get the mobile phone or refund the money.

3. On 04.10.2018, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was willing to refund the entire money to the complainant. 2019:DHC:393 BAIL APPLN. 2331/2018 Petitioner was granted interim protection subject to joining investigation.

4. Learned APP informs that petitioner has joined investigation. She further informs that petitioner has refunded the entire amount of Rs.1,30,000/- to the complainant, which is confirmed by the complainant who is also present in the Court.

5. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view of the totality of the facts and circumstances, I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.

6. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the arresting officer/IO/SHO shall release the petitioner on bail on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Investigating Officer/SHO concerned. Petitioner shall not do anything that may prejudice either the trial or the prosecution witnesses.

7. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

8. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J JANUARY 21, 2019