BAIL APPLN./1416/2024 of KRITIKA WADHWA Vs THE STATE
Parties
- End of picture text -----<br> (PETITIONER)
- > picture [376 x 61] intentionally omitted <== (RESPONDENT)
Cites (0 resolved of 1 detected)
1 case citation detected in this judgment's own text, but none resolved to a judgment page in this build yet.
Full text
solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ BAIL APPLN. 1416/2024 KRITIKA WADHWA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Lakshay Joshi and Mr. Alamin, Advs.
versus
THE STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State with SI Arvind Kumar Saini, PS Geeta Colony.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRIO R R25.10.2024
1. By way of present application, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No. 111/2024 registered under Sections 336/506/307/120B/34 IPC & 25/27 Arms Act at P.S. Geeta Colony, Delhi.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner submits that pursuant to the grant of interim protection, the applicant has joined the investigation and even the chargesheet stands filed. It is stated that as per the case of the prosecution, the applicant’s brother was statedly in relationship with the complainant’s daughter. It is also submitted that the applicant’s brother is in custody in another FIR. Further, it is submitted that the role attributed to the present applicant is of having made phone call to the son of the complainant, threatening him of dire consequence. This call was statedly made on 25.02.2024. Learned counsel submits that the FIR came to be registered in the context of an incident, which had occurred on 01.03.2024
when three persons visited the house of the complainant and threatened her daughter as well as fired gun shots in the air. In this regard, it is stated that it is not the case of the prosecution that the said act was done at the behest of or in conspiracy with the present applicant.
3. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application. It is, however, stated that the applicant has joined the investigation and is not stated to be involved in any other case.
4. Considering that there is time gap of 06 days between the alleged phone call and the incident as well as the fact that the applicant has joined the investigation, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant be released on bail subject to her furnishing personal bond in the sum of ₹25,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer/SHO of the concerned Police Station and also subject to the following further conditions:-
(i) At the time of furnishing bail bond, the applicant shall
provide the mobile number, which she undertakes to keep operational at all times during the pendency of the trial.
(ii) The applicant shall join the investigation as and when asked.
(iii) The applicant shall inform the concerned Investigating Officer about her current residential address.
(iv) In case of change of residential addresses/contact details,
the applicant shall promptly inform the same to the concerned Investigating Officer/SHO.
(v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly try to get in
touch with the complainant or any other prosecution witnesses or
tamper with the evidence.
(vi) The applicant shall regularly appear before the trial Court.
5. The application is disposed of in the above terms.
6. Needless to state that nothing observed hereinabove shall amount to an expression on the merits of the case and shall not have bearing on the trial of the case as the same has been expressed only for the purpose of the disposal of the present bail application.
OCTOBER 25, 2024akc
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J