BAIL APPLN./1044/2016 of PARVEEN YADAV Vs THE STATE ( NCT OF DELHI)

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+BAIL APPLN. 1044/2016PARVEEN YADAV

..... Petitioner

Through:Mr.B.S.Rana, Ms.Babita Ahlawat andMr.Satyam Sisodia, Advs.

versus

THE STATE ( NCT OF DELHI)

..... Respondent

Through:Mr.Amit Chadha, APP.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI

O R R%14.07.2016

1.This is an application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grantof anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.375/2015 underSections 380/448/34/468/471/120B/411 IPC registered at PS: Uttam

Nagar.

2.Thebrieffactsof the casearethatthe complainantsSh.A.G.Shekhar and Sh.Sukhbinder Singh Saini had bought theproperty in question bearing No.F-2/13, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar,Delhi on 04.05.2012 from one Sh.T.Kanak Raj measuring 200 squareyards.Thereafter, dispute arose between the above-mentioned

parties which was settled before the Hon’ble High Court and on thebasis of the said settlement dated 05.12.2014, the complainantsbrought the furniture and some kitchen items and placed them in thesaid property. It is stated that on 31.12.2014 when the saidcomplainants visited their above mentioned property, they found thatthe locks had been broken and the petitioner and one Dilip Yadavwere sitting inside the house. When the complainants tried to enter theproperty in question, 5-6 persons namely Dilip, Monty, Jitender Batra@Lucky,oneladyandthepetitionerstartedabusingthecomplainants. Thereafter, the complainants dialled 100 and handedover complaint along with documents and the videography of thegoods to the police.It is stated that after the settlement, thepossession of the property was handed over to both the complainants,the factum of which has been supported by Sh.S.William James, whoduring his investigation has admitted the factum of handing over thepossession to the complainants. It is also stated that as per the reportof the notary public namely Sh.O.P.Chaudhary and Ms.MithileshAggarwala, the documents executed in favour of Dilip Yadav,Rajender Chopra and others did not bear their stamps and the

signatures/initials and in view of the same, Sections 468/471/120B

IPC were added.

3.I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that sincethe other co-accused Jitender Batra @ Lucky has already beengranted interim bail by this Court, the petitioner also claims parity onthe same ground and moreover, the petitioner is ready to joininvestigation.

5.Per contra, it is stated by the learned APP for the State that thepetitioner is absconding and NBWs have been issued against him.Also, proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. have been initiatedagainst the petitioner and he is purposely evading arrest and hiscustodial interrogation is much required for recovery of the stolenarticles as well as the recovery of the forged and fabricated stamp ofthe notary public used in execution of the documents. If released onbail, he may tamper with the evidence and may threat or induce thewitnesses.

6.In the given facts and circumstances, since NBWs have been

issued against the petitioner and also process under Section 82Cr.P.C. is pending before the Court below, no ground is made out togrant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.The application is accordingly dismissed.

JULY 14, 2016/dm

P.S.TEJI, J