Pawan Kumar Anthony vs.the State

Pawan Kumar Anthony vs The State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Feb 19, 2019

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1221545

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/1221545
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Feb 19, 2019
Subject: Right to Information

Case Summary

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

Right to Information

Key legal issue: Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pawan Kumar Anthony

Respondent

The State

Excerpt

.....sheet has already been filed. he submits that none of the dowry articles could be recovered.4. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to return all the admitted articles. learned counsel for the bail appln.1429/2017 page 1 of 2 complainant submits that the petitioner had admitted to a list of articles/home appliances which was filed on record. he further submits that the said items may be recovered.... petitioner who is present in court in person has handed over a photocopy of the said list which is taken on record.5. it is agreed between the parties that the articles mentioned in the list shall be returned by the petitioner to the complainant in the presence of the investigating officer on 23.02.2019 at 2.00 pm at police station sabzi mandi, delhi.6. keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, i am of the view that the petitioner has made 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. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/sho concerned.8. 9. the petition is allowed in the above terms. order dasti under signatures of the court master. february19 2019 ‘rs’ bail appln.1429/2017 sanjeev sachdeva, j page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:

19. 02.2019 BAIL APPLN. 1429/2017 PAWAN KUMAR ANTHONY THE STATE versus ........ Petitioner

..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner

: Mr. K. Mathur and Mr. S. Gupta, Advs. For the Respondent : Mr. Hirein Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with ASI Anand Pal Mr. K.K. Jha, Adv. for complainant CORAM:-

"HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner

seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.638/2015 under Sections 406/498-A/34 IPC, Police Station Sabzi Mandi, Delhi.

2. 3.... Petitioner

was granted interim protection by order dated 26.07.2017. Learned Addl. PP submits that the investigation is complete and the charge sheet has already been filed. He submits that none of the dowry articles could be recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to return all the admitted articles. Learned counsel for the BAIL APPLN.1429/2017 Page 1 of 2 complainant submits that the petitioner had admitted to a list of articles/home appliances which was filed on record. He further submits that the said items may be recovered.... Petitioner

who is present in Court in person has handed over a photocopy of the said list which is taken on record.

5. It is agreed between the parties that the articles mentioned in the list shall be returned by the petitioner to the complainant in the presence of the Investigating Officer on 23.02.2019 at 2.00 PM at Police Station Sabzi Mandi, Delhi.

6. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner has made 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. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Investigating Officer/SHO concerned.

8. 9. The petition is allowed in the above terms. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master. FEBRUARY19 2019 ‘rs’ BAIL APPLN.1429/2017 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2019 Same Parties Pawan Kumar Anthony vs The State Same Subject Right to Information