Allowed

Nadeem Ahmad v. State NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC24 Jul 2018BAIL APPLN./565/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, younger brother of the prospective groom, in a false implication dowry case. The court directed the petitioner to join the investigation and refrain from leaving the country without permission.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of ₹25,000 with one surety of like amount.

Nadeem Ahmad Vs State NCT of Delhi — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~12

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 565/2018

¶4

NADEEM AHMAD ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Deepak K. Tyagi, Advocate. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State with ASI Jai Kishan, P.S. Mangol Puri. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA O R D E R % 24.07.2018

¶5

By this petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 83/2018 under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act registered at Police Station Mangol Puri. The above noted FIR was registered on the complaint of one Ms.Rukshar, who alleged that after her divorce, her marriage was again fixed with Akil. On 4^th February, 2018, the baraat was to come but at 4.00 P.M., three persons including Nadeem, the petitioner came to their house and told that unless, the motorcycle is given, baraat will not come. Even, Akil telephoned her and refused to bring the baraat unless, the motorcycle is given. During the course of investigation, Akil, the prospective groom has since been arrested and has remained in custody for 15 days.

¶6

BAIL APPLN. 565/2018

¶7

Page 1 of 2

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner points out to the contents of the FIR and states that false implication of all the members is evident from the fact that the complainant has named the petitioner, who is the younger brother of the prospective groom Akil and sister-in-law, besides father of the groom Mohd. Ishak, who had already died 10 years ago.

¶9

Learned APP for State, on instructions from the IO submits that though, the exact date of death of Mohd. Ishak is not known but when the marriage was to take place, Mohd. Ishak was not alive.

¶10

Considering that the main accused Akil has already been in custody for 15 days and the petitioner, who is the younger brother of the prospective groom Akil has joined the investigation, this court deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It is, therefore, directed that in the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹25,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/SHO concerned, further subject to the condition that the petitioner will join the investigation as and when directed by the Investigating Officer and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court concerned and in case of change of residential address the same will be intimated to the Court concerned by way of an affidavit.

¶11

Petition is disposed of.

¶12

Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

JULY 24, 2018

BAIL APPLN. 565/2018

¶17

Page 2 of 2

Nadeem Ahmad v. State NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nadeem Ahmad v. State NCT of Delhi

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

Vikaram Dhawan Vs State (Gnct) of Delhi

Chote Lal Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi

Rahul Kumar Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

Arshad Vs State

Arun Kumar Vs the State

Pankaj Budhiraja & Ors. Vs State & Anr.