Rohit vs State (Nct Of Delhi)

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J

Petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No. 56/2018 under Sections 354/354-B/354-D/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station Chandni Mahal, Delhi. Section 8 of the POCSO Act was also added in respect of petitioner/applicant - Inder.

The allegations are that the petitioners are neighbours and that they misbehaved with the complainant and her daughter.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners have settled the disputes with the complainant and her daughter. He submits that the petitioners are aged about 22 and 23 years respectively and incarceration would prejudice them seriously.

Petitioners were granted interim protection by order dated 11.04.2018 subject to their joining investigation.

Learned Addl. PP, under instructions, submits that the petitioners did join investigation whenever they were so required by the Investigating Officer and investigation qua the role of the petitioners is complete and the chargesheet is in the process of being finalized for filing in the Trial Court.

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 petitioners have made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the arresting officer/IO/SHO shall release the petitioners on bail on their furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Investigating Officer/SHO concerned. Petitioners shall not do anything that may prejudice either the trial or the prosecution witnesses. Petitioners shall not contact the complainant or her daughter.

The petitions are disposed of in the above terms.

Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.