Pooja Vs State

This is an application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail, filed on behalf of petitioner in case FIR No. 422/2024, registered at Police Station Kanjhawala under Sections 308(2)(4)(5)/125/3(5)/61(2) BNS and Sections 25/27 of Arms Act.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the charge sheet has already been filed in this case and petitioner joined the investigation during the pendency of the present application and, therefore, she is not required for further investigation. He further submits that there is one day’s delay in registration of FIR and the role of the present applicant is confined to the extent that she collected Rs. 2,00,000/- from the complainant

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 00:06:04

¶14

from his office in the first week of July, 2024. It is also submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in property dispute inasmuch as the complainant had sold the property bearing Plot No. 347, Measuring 60 sq. Yards, situated in Revenue Estate of Village Karala, Delhi, to the applicant, in respect of which, General Power of Attorney, Agreement to Sell, Affidavit, Undertaking, Receipt and Deed of Will has been executed. He has placed on record a copy of the General Power of Attorney, executed by the complainant in favour of the applicant. It is submitted that without being the owner of the said property, complainant had executed such documents in favour of the applicant and that is the real reason why applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶15

The bail application has been opposed by the learned APP appearing for the State, submitting that only preliminary charge sheet has been filed so far and applicant has been kept in column No. 11 as she was absconding at the time of filing of charge sheet. With regard to the delay, it is stated that the complainant called the PCR, immediately after the occurrence, and thus there is no delay in reporting the matter to the Police. Learned APP also submits that applicant is the wife of Deepak @ Teetar, against whom there are 37 pending cases. The applicant used to take instructions from Deepak @ Teetar for the purpose of extortion. He further submits that applicant is required for custodial interrogation for recovery of money and for unveiling the conspiracy.

¶16

Admittedly, the role of the present applicant is confined to the extent that in the first week of July, 2024 she and co-accused Ajay Mathur went outside the office of complainant and took Rs. 2,00,000/- from him. Her role is neither extended to the subsequent acts, nor in the incident of firing of the

¶17

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 00:06:04

¶18

gunshots. During the pendency of the anticipatory application, the applicant has joined the investigation. Admittedly, co-accused Satbir @ Satvir Mathur, whose role was also confined to the first incident of extortion of Rs. 2,50,000/-, has since been enlarged on bail.

¶19

Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and also the fact that applicant is a lady and has joined the investigation, it is directed that in the event of her arrest, she be released, subject to her joining the investigation as and when directed and on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- with surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer/Investigating Agency/SHO and subject to the following terms and conditions:-

¶20

a) The applicant shall provide her mobile number, which shall be kept operational at all times during the pendency of the trial.

¶21

b) The applicant shall join the investigation as and when directed.

¶22

c) In case of change in residential address/contact details, she would immediately inform the same to the Investigating Officer/concerned SHO.

¶23

d) The applicant shall not try to contact the complainant or other prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence.

¶24

e) The applicant shall regularly appear before the trial Court.

¶25

f) The applicant shall not indulge herself in any criminal activity.

¶26

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

¶27

MAY 7, 2025 /vd

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 00:06:04

Pooja v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pooja v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Surpal Cycles Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Khurram Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Karan Arora and Ors. Vs State of Delhi NCT and Anr.

Sarthak Jain and Others Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Mayank & Ors. Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Dinesh Dalal & Anr. Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.