Allowed

Nishant Pal v. State

Delhi HC9 Apr 2018BAIL APPLN./233/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, Nishant Pal, in a case under IPC Sections 376, 323, 506, and 34. The court noted that refusal to marry resulted from the death of the petitioner's brother and that the matter had allegedly settled, though the quashing petition was dismissed. Bail was granted on bonding conditions.

What did the court decide?

anticipatory bail granted on furnishing a personal bond of ₹25,000 with one surety bond of the like amount, subject to conditions of joining investigation and not leaving the country.

Nishant Pal Vs State — Bail and Remand | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~9

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 233/2018

¶4

NISHANT PAL ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Surinder Kumar, Ms.Jyotsana Gupta and Mr.Ritesh Bindra, Advocates

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Rajni Gupta, APP with WSI Sangeeta, PS Mangol Puri

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 09.04.2018

¶10

By this petition, petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.1437/2017 under Section 376/323/506/34 IPC registered at PS Mangol Puri.

¶11

In the above noted FIR, the complainant alleged that the petitioner was her batch mate during the course and on the promise of marriage, they both became friendly. Since they loved each other and the petitioner promised to marry her, they had physical relationship, however, later the petitioner refused to marry her. Statement of landlord of the prosecutrix has also been recorded who stated that petitioner used to visit the prosecutrix at her residence.

¶12

Learned counsel for petitioner contends that though the petitioner intended to marry the prosecutrix, however, in the meantime, his elder brother passed away, thus he was constrained to marry the widow of his BAIL APPLN. 233/2018 Page 1 of 2

¶13

elder brother. According to learned counsel for petitioner, the parties have settled the matter and in this regard, they filed a petition for quashing of the above noted FIR being W.P.(Crl.) No.965/2018, however, the same has been dismissed by this Court on 6^th April, 2018.

¶14

Considering the nature of allegations and that the reason for nonfulfilment of promise of marriage was the supervening circumstance of death of petitioner’s brother, this Court deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner. It is, therefore directed that in the event of arrest, petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹25,000/with one surety bond of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/SHO concerned, further subject to the condition that he will join the investigation as and when directed by the Investigating Officer and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court and in case of any change in the residential address, the same will be intimated to the Court concerned by way of an affidavit.

¶15

Petition is disposed of.

¶16

Dasti.

¶17

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

¶18

APRIL 09, 2018 mamta

¶19

Page 2 of 2

¶20

BAIL APPLN. 233/2018

Nishant Pal v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nishant Pal v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arshad Ali Vs State(Nct of Delhi)

Shan E Alam Vs Pawan Kumar

Ranjeet Singh Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Krishan Chander Sharma Vs the State(Nct of Dlehi ) & Ors.

Deepak Mahajan Vs Satya Prakash

Mehmood Topiwala Vs State (Nct of Delhi)