Madhu; Santosh; Geeta v. State (NCT of Delhi)

Delhi High Court · 11 May 2018 · 2018:DHC:8185
A.K. Pathak
BAILAPPLN. 1695/2017; BAIL APPLN. 1709/2017; BAILAPPLN. 1710/2017
2018:DHC:8185
criminal appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed anticipatory bail applications of accused in an attempt to murder case involving kerosene oil assault and dowry harassment allegations, holding that no case was made out for bail.

Full Text
Translation output
$-42, 43 and 44 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAILAPPLN. 1695/2017
MADHU
Through:
VERSUS
STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Through:
Petitioner Mr. Pulkit Batra, Adv. Respondent Dr. M.P. Singh, APP for Statewith
W/ASI Anil Sharma, P.S. H. Nagar.
Mr. Jacob Joseph, Mr. Nayyar Kadar and Mr. Manish Kumar, Advs.
AND
BAIL APPLN. 1709/2017
SANTOSH Petitioner
Through: Mr. PulkitBatra, Adv.
VERSUS
Through:
Dr. M.P. Singh, APP for State with AND
BAILAPPLN. 1710/2017
GEETA
Through:
VERSUS
Through:
Petitioner Mr. Pulkit Batra, Adv. Dr. M.P. Singh, APP for State with
2018:DHC:8185
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
11.05.2018 Petitioners-Madhu and Geeta are sisters-in-law; whereas petitioner-Santosh is mother-in-law of complainant. There are specific allegations against them in the FIR. Complainant has specifically stated that petitioners came together along with her brother-in-law namely, Ravinder Kumar and poured kerosene oil on her, however, she ran outside.
There are other allegations of demand of dowry and harassment as well against the petitioners.
Learned APP points out that offence under Section 307 IPC has been added.
MLC of complainant has been produced and perused wherein doctor has mentioned about smell of kerosene oil in the clothes ofthe complainant.
Keeping in mind these allegations, in my view, no case is made out to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
All the above-noted bail appHcations are dismissed.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
MAY 11,2018/ga 2018:DHC:8185
JUDGMENT