Virender Pandey vs State (Govt Of NCT Of Delhi)

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.467/2017 under Sections 419/468/471/120B/34 of the IPC at Police Station Geeta Colony.

Allegations against the petitioner in the FIR are that the petitioner is alleged to have told the complainant, subsequent to a raid by BSES officials that

he would be in a position to have the matter settled with the BSES team. Thereafter the complainant is allegedly been approached by one Pankaj

Dhawan who is alleged to have called up the petitioner over phone and made the petitioner speak to the complainant and petitioner is alleged to have

who confirmed that the said Pankaj Dhawan was an employee of BSES.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated and as per the allegations no payment was made to the

petitioner. Further there has been a settlement between Pankaj Dhawan and the complainant.

Learned APP informs that the petitioner had joined investigation and the investigation is complete and chargesheet is in the process of being filed.

Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances and without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner has

made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.

In the event of arrest, petitioner shall be released on bail on, petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like

amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer/SHO. Petitioner shall not do anything which may prejudice the trial or the

prosecution witnesses.

Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.