Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN.662/2018
DINESH KAPOOR Petitioner
Through: Mr.Ravi Chawla and Mr.Komal Sharma,Advocates
BAIL APPLN.662/2018
DINESH KAPOOR Petitioner
Through: Mr.Ravi Chawla and Mr.Komal Sharma,Advocates
VERSUS
STATE(GOVT OF NOT OF DELHI) Respondent
Through: Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja,APP with SI Pukhraj
Mr.Vijay Kant Srivastava, Advocate for the complainant with complainant in person
Through: Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja,APP with SI Pukhraj
Mr.Vijay Kant Srivastava, Advocate for the complainant with complainant in person
BAIL APPLN.663/2018
KISHORE KAPOOR Petitioner
Through: Mr.Ravi Chawla and Mr.Komal Sharma,Advocates
KISHORE KAPOOR Petitioner
Through: Mr.Ravi Chawla and Mr.Komal Sharma,Advocates
VERSUS
STATE(GOVT OF NOT OF DELHI) Respondent
Through: Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja,APP with SI Pukhraj
Mr.Vijay Kant Srivastava, Advocate for the complainant with complainant in person
Through: Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja,APP with SI Pukhraj
Mr.Vijay Kant Srivastava, Advocate for the complainant with complainant in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
01.11.2018 The allegations have been made about complicity of the petitioners Dinesh Kapoor and Kishore Kapoor in offences punishable
01.11.2018 The allegations have been made about complicity of the petitioners Dinesh Kapoor and Kishore Kapoor in offences punishable
BAIL APPLN.662/2018 &663/2018 page 1 of4
2018:DHC:8462 under Sections 420, 34 IPC, which is the subject matter, of investigation into FIR no.128/2018 of police station Prashant Vihar registered on the complaint ofNand Lai Bhatia. The petitioners had come up with these petitions seeking anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in the said case. By similar orders passed on 23.03.2018, interim protection against arrest was granted subject to conditions inclusive oftheyjoining investigation as and when required to do so.
The said orders have continued to operate till date. The parties were referred to the process ofmediation in the hope ofthey resolving the dispute amicably. Though such process has not borne fruit yet,the parties including the complainant, who is present in person with counsel submit that the efforts for amicable resolution are still underway.
On 13.09.2018, the petitioners had submitted that in order to show their bonafide, without prejudice to the contentions of boih sides, they were ready to deposit with the jurisdictional court of cognizance, an amount of Rs.25 Lakhs, as was submitted by the counsel for the complainant,to be the amount in dispute. Pursuantto the liberty granted on such offer made by the petitioners, they have deposited two fixed receipts ofthe total amount ofRs.25 Lakhs with the jurisdictional Magistrate, as per the proceedings recorded on
23.10.2018,copy whereofhas been submitted on 27.10.2018.It shall be ensured that the said two fixed deposit receipts remain valid and forthis steps will betaken fortheir auto renewal.
Againstthis backdrop,the counselforthe complainantsubmits
2018:DHC:8462 under Sections 420, 34 IPC, which is the subject matter, of investigation into FIR no.128/2018 of police station Prashant Vihar registered on the complaint ofNand Lai Bhatia. The petitioners had come up with these petitions seeking anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in the said case. By similar orders passed on 23.03.2018, interim protection against arrest was granted subject to conditions inclusive oftheyjoining investigation as and when required to do so.
The said orders have continued to operate till date. The parties were referred to the process ofmediation in the hope ofthey resolving the dispute amicably. Though such process has not borne fruit yet,the parties including the complainant, who is present in person with counsel submit that the efforts for amicable resolution are still underway.
On 13.09.2018, the petitioners had submitted that in order to show their bonafide, without prejudice to the contentions of boih sides, they were ready to deposit with the jurisdictional court of cognizance, an amount of Rs.25 Lakhs, as was submitted by the counsel for the complainant,to be the amount in dispute. Pursuantto the liberty granted on such offer made by the petitioners, they have deposited two fixed receipts ofthe total amount ofRs.25 Lakhs with the jurisdictional Magistrate, as per the proceedings recorded on
23.10.2018,copy whereofhas been submitted on 27.10.2018.It shall be ensured that the said two fixed deposit receipts remain valid and forthis steps will betaken fortheir auto renewal.
Againstthis backdrop,the counselforthe complainantsubmits
BAIL APPLN.662/2018&663/2018 page2of4
[& V that he has no objection to the prayer for anticipatory bail. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor leaves the matter to the discretion ofthe court confirming at the same time that the petitioners have been cooperating with the investigation so far.
In the above facts and circumstances, while directing that the aforementioned amount of Rs.25 Lakhs in the form of two fixed deposit receipts deposited with the jurisdictional Magistrate shall be retained for being availed for appropriate directions atthe appropriate stage, the prayer ofthe petitioners for release on anticipatory bail is granted.
It is directed that in the event ofthe petitioners being arrested, they shall be released on bail by the arresting officer on furnishing personal bond in the sum ofRs.20,000/- each with one surety in the like amountsubjectto the following further conditions
(i) The petitioners shall continue cooperating with the investigation andjoin the same as and when called upon to do so;
(ii) The petitioners shall not come in contact with or try to influence any ofthe witnesses connected to the case;
(iii) Prior to their release, they shall give the telephone numbers of self and ofat least one other responsible family member besides that ofthe surety to the investigating officer;
(iv) They shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts ofthe case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
BAIL APPLN.662/2018&663/2018 page 3 of4
// (v) They shall not leave India without the prior permission of the court of cognizance or the trial court, as the case may be,and to ensure due compliance with this condition and shall deposit their passport,ifthey hold the same,with the said court.
This order will inure only till the date offirst appearance ofthe petitioners in the event ofa charge-sheet being filed on conclusion of the investigation and process being issued against him by the court of
C cognizance.
The petitions stand disposed ofin above terms.
Dasti.
R.K.GAUBA,J NOVEMBER 01,2018 Yg
[& V that he has no objection to the prayer for anticipatory bail. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor leaves the matter to the discretion ofthe court confirming at the same time that the petitioners have been cooperating with the investigation so far.
In the above facts and circumstances, while directing that the aforementioned amount of Rs.25 Lakhs in the form of two fixed deposit receipts deposited with the jurisdictional Magistrate shall be retained for being availed for appropriate directions atthe appropriate stage, the prayer ofthe petitioners for release on anticipatory bail is granted.
It is directed that in the event ofthe petitioners being arrested, they shall be released on bail by the arresting officer on furnishing personal bond in the sum ofRs.20,000/- each with one surety in the like amountsubjectto the following further conditions
(i) The petitioners shall continue cooperating with the investigation andjoin the same as and when called upon to do so;
(ii) The petitioners shall not come in contact with or try to influence any ofthe witnesses connected to the case;
(iii) Prior to their release, they shall give the telephone numbers of self and ofat least one other responsible family member besides that ofthe surety to the investigating officer;
(iv) They shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts ofthe case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
BAIL APPLN.662/2018&663/2018 page 3 of4
// (v) They shall not leave India without the prior permission of the court of cognizance or the trial court, as the case may be,and to ensure due compliance with this condition and shall deposit their passport,ifthey hold the same,with the said court.
This order will inure only till the date offirst appearance ofthe petitioners in the event ofa charge-sheet being filed on conclusion of the investigation and process being issued against him by the court of
C cognizance.
The petitions stand disposed ofin above terms.
Dasti.
R.K.GAUBA,J NOVEMBER 01,2018 Yg
BAIL APPLN.662/2018&663/2018 page4of4
JUDGMENT