BAIL APPLN./1324/2018 of PRATEEK DIPCHANDANI Vs THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+BAIL APPLN. 1324/2018

PRATEEK DIPCHANDANI

..... Petitioner

Through:Mr. Sudharshan Rajan, Adv.

versus

THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)..... RespondentThrough:Mr. Ashish Dutta, APP for the Statewith SI Sumer Singh, Spl. Staff West.Mr. Kartik Khanna, Mr. LovishSharma & Mr. Gobind Malhotra,Advs.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBAO R R%18.07.2018

The theft from the residential house of the first informant MaheshKapoor took place sometime in April, 2015 when, concededly, with his tacitconcern the petitioner and certain others were staying in the said house, hewith his family being away to Dehradoon.The theft involved loss ofjewellery stated to be worth Rs. 1 crore.On the complaint lodged on23.04.2015 FIR No. 498/2015 was registered by police station Janak Puri.The investigation by the local police not having made headway, the case wastransferred to special task force. During the course of investigation carriedout at that stage, chance prints were taken from the crime scene, some ofthem matching with that of the petitioner herein, there being similar reportqua one more person Affan Nawaz. The petitioner being one of the suspectsBAIL APPLN. 1324/2018page 1 of 3

was also subjected to polygraph test, the report whereof is stated to indicatethat his responses were “deceptive”. The investigation, however, could notlead to any tangible evidence – direct or indirect showing complicity ofanyone including of the petitioner being unearthed.The police filed anuntraced report in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate on 13.05.2016. Thesaid report resulted in order dated 07.11.2017 with direction to the policefor further investigation. It is during the course of further investigation thatnotices were sent under Section 160 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner but he insteadapplied for anticipatory bail in the Court of Sessions and would not initiallyappear before the investigating officer. It is, however, confirmed that afterhe was granted protection against arrest by order dated 31.05.2018, thepetitioner has appeared before the investigating officer and was interrogatedat length on 02.06.2018. No further evidence incriminating the petitioner,however, is stated to have come up till date.

Mere chance prints at the crime scene, prima facie, would not sufficeinasmuch as it is well conceded that the petitioner had stayed in thehousehold on the relevant night with the approval of complainant.

In these circumstances, case for release of the applicant onanticipatory bail is made out.

Thus, it is directed that in the event of the petitioner being arrested,he shall be released on bail by the arresting officer on furnishing personalbonds in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount subjectto the following further conditions:-

(i)The petitioner shall continue cooperating with the investigationand join the same as and when called upon to do so;BAIL APPLN. 1324/2018page 2 of 3

(ii)The petitioner shall not come in contact with or try to influenceany of the witnesses connected to the case;any of the witnesses connected to the case;

(iii)Prior to his release, he shall give the telephone numbers of selfand of at least one other responsible family member besidesthat of the surety to the investigating officer;and of at least one other responsible family member besidesthat of the surety to the investigating officer;

(iv)He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threator promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the caseso as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to theCourt or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the caseso as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to theCourt or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

(v)This order will inure only till the date of first appearance of thepetitioner in the event of charge-sheet being filed onconclusion of the investigation and process being issued againsthim by the court of cognizance.petitioner in the event of charge-sheet being filed onconclusion of the investigation and process being issued againsthim by the court of cognizance.The petition is disposed of in above terms.

Dasti.

R.K.GAUBA, J

JULY 18, 2018nk

BAIL APPLN. 1324/2018

page 3 of 3