CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Aveen Kuar Hotla vs State Gnct Of Delhi

Delhi High Court · Decided on 30 November 2018 · Citation: (2018) 11 DEL CK 0302

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 468, 471, 506
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1802 Of 2017
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 358 words

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J

1.

Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No. 635/2015 under Sections 468/471/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station Sabji Mandi, Delhi.

2.

The allegations are that the petitioner was a witness to a receipt-cum-agreement based on which another FIR being FIR No. 73/2012 was registered in which the complainant of the present FIR was the accused. During investigation of the said FIR, it transpired that the document i.e. receipt-cum-agreement which was alleged to have been witnessed by the petitioner were forged as the signatures of the petitioner did not match and accordingly a cancellation report was filed.

3.

Subject FIR was registered against the petitioner on the complaint that he had forged the said receipt-cum-agreement based on which the other FIR was registered against the complainant.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated and that the document is genuine. Learned counsel submits that the complainant in FIR No. 73/2012 is protesting against the cancellation report filed by the prosecution in that FIR.

5.

By order dated 08.09.2017, the petitioner was granted interim protection subject to joining investigation.

6.

Learned Addl. PP, under instructions, submits that the petitioner joined investigation whenever was so required by the Investigating Officer and investigation qua the role of the petitioner is merely complete and the chargesheet is in the process of being finalised for being filed in Court.

7.

Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances and on perusal of the records, I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.

8.

Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the arresting officer/IO/SHO shall release the petitioner on bail on his furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Investigating Officer/SHO concerned. Petitioner shall not do anything that may prejudice either the trial or the prosecution witnesses.

9.

The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

10.

Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.