Subhash Kumar @ Sehdev vs.state

Subhash Kumar @ Sehdev vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Oct 11, 2018

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1218653

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1218653
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Oct 11, 2018
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Subhash Kumar @ Sehdev

Respondent

State

Excerpt

.....j.(oral) 1.... petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in fir no.188/2017 under sections 420/376/495 ipc, police station mansarovar park.2. the allegations in the fir against the petitioner are that the petitioner, who was already married, without disclosing the factum of his marriage, contracted the second marriage with the prosecutrix and thereafter misled her into cohabiting with the petitioner.3. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. he submits that no offence under section 376 ipc is made out and at best an offence under sectionsipc is made out. bail appln. 1729/2017 page 1 of 2 4.... petitioner was granted interim protection by order dated 31.08.2017 subject to the petitioner joining investigation.5. learned app for the state confirms that the petitioner did join investigation whenever was so required by the investigating officer. he submits that the investigation is nearly complete and chargesheet is in the process of being filed in court.6. without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the record, i am satisfied that the petitioner has been able to make out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.7. 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. 25,000/- 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 investigation or the prosecution witnesses.... petitioner shall not contact the prosecutrix or her family.... petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the trial court. the petition is disposed of in the above terms. order dasti under signatures of the court master.8. 9. october11 2018 st sanjeev sachdeva, j bail appln. 1729/2017 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI BAIL APPLN. 1729/2017 Judgment delivered on:

11. 10.2018 % + SUBHASH KUMAR @ SEHDEV STATE Advocates who appeared in this case: versus ........ Petitioner

..... Respondent For the... Petitioner

s : Mr. Kamlesh Mahajan, Advocate. For the... RESPONDENTS

: Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, APP for the State. Mr. Shiv Gupta with Mr. Jalaj Agarwal, Mr. Z.U. Islam and Mr. Atul Agarwal, Advocates for the complainant. CORAM:-

"HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1110.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner

seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.188/2017 under Sections 420/376/495 IPC, Police Station Mansarovar Park.

2. The allegations in the FIR against the petitioner are that the petitioner, who was already married, without disclosing the factum of his marriage, contracted the second marriage with the prosecutrix and thereafter misled her into cohabiting with the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that no offence under Section 376 IPC is made out and at best an offence under Sections
IPC is made out. BAIL APPLN. 1729/2017 Page 1 of 2 4.... Petitioner

was granted interim protection by order dated 31.08.2017 subject to the petitioner joining investigation.

5. Learned APP for the State confirms that the petitioner did join investigation whenever was so required by the Investigating Officer. He submits that the investigation is nearly complete and chargesheet is in the process of being filed in Court.

6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the record, I am satisfied that the petitioner has been able to make out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.

7. 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. 25,000/- 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 investigation or the prosecution witnesses.... Petitioner

shall not contact the prosecutrix or her family.... Petitioner

shall not leave the country without the permission of the Trial Court. The Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

8. 9. OCTOBER11 2018 st SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J BAIL APPLN. 1729/2017 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties Subhash Kumar @ Sehdev vs State Same Subject Criminal