BAIL APPLN./1855/2019 of PRABHA SHARMA Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+BAIL APPLN. 1855/2019PRABHA SHARMA..... PetitionerPRABHA SHARMA..... Petitioner

..... Petitioner

ThroughMr. Rakesh Malhotra, Adv.

versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR..... RespondentThroughMr. Tarang Srivastav, APP withSI Kanahiya Lal, P.S. New FriendsColony.Mr. Jatin Sehgal and Mr. AdhinathSingh, Advs. for R2/Complainant.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRUO R R%25.11.2019

1.The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, seekinganticipatorybailinFIRNo.34/2019,underSections323/451/452/506/341/509/354/120-B/34 of the IPC, registered with PoliceStation New Friends Colony.

2.The said FIR was registered at the instance of the complainant(mother-in-law of the petitioner’s daughter Vipra Sharma). The complainanthad alleged that the petitioner along with her daughter-Vipra Sharma and herhusband, Om Prakash Sharma, and some other friends and family membershad entered her house and forcefully looted cash, jewellery and otherexpensive items. They had also threatened to kill the complainant’s sonwhen they protested. It is alleged that one of the persons (husband of Vipra

Sharma’s sister) had also tried to outrage her modesty. She stated that on18.8.2018 she had gone out for some important work and when she cameback, she found that her almirah was open and jewellery and other expensiveitems were stolen.She checked the CCTV footage and found that herdaughter-in-law, Vipra Sharma, had taken away the said items in handbag.She made complaint to the police by dialling 100. She also alleged thatVipra Sharma had got her son arrested on false allegations. She states thatlater at night, at about 12:30-3:30 am, Vipra Sharma along with 10/12friends and relatives, including her father and mother (petitioner herein),forcibly entered her house and took away jewellery, camera, hand watchesand other items, which they loaded in truck. Her son was also brought bythe police to her house. When he tried to stop the said persons, theythreatened to kill him.

3.The complainant also stated that the transcript of the conversationindicates that conspiracy was hatched between the petitioner, her daughterand other persons to falsely implicate the complainant’s son and their familymembers.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that thepetitioner is trying to resolve all disputes with the complainant and thematter is pending before the Delhi High Court Mediation and ConciliationCentre.

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner further states she is fullycooperating with the Investigating officer and she has also voluntarilyagreed to provide her voice samples, which are scheduled to be taken on 16[th]and 17[th]of January, 2020.

6.In view of the above, this Court considers it apposite to allow thepresent petition.

7.The petitioner is granted anticipatory bail on furnishing person bondof ₹25,000/- and one surety of an equivalent amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.The petitioner shall also provide her mobilenumber and ensure that she is reachable at all times.

8.It is clarified that the Investigating Officer is at liberty to apply forcancellation of bail if the petitioner fails to cooperate in the investigation. Itis further clarified that this order will inure to the benefit of the petitioner tilla charge-sheet is filed.

9.The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

NOVEMBER 25, 2019DR

VIBHU BAKHRU, J