Final Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 1
Bail Matter No. 1844/2025
State Vs. Sushil Sharma
FIR No. 538/2025
PS (Harash Vihar)
U/S 406/498A/34 IPC
16.12.2025
Present: Sh. Jitendra Sharma, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. S.K. Verma, Ld. Counsel for the applicants /
accused.
IO SI Deepanshu Choudhary in person.
Complainant with Ld. Counsel Sh. Anurag Singh.
This is an application U/s 482 BNSS moved on
behalf of applicant/ accused Sushil Sharma for grant of
anticipatory bail.
Reply to the present anticipatory bail filed by IO.
Same is taken on record. Copy of the same supplied to Ld. Counsel
for applicant/ accused.
Arguments on the present anticipatory bail
application, heard.
Put up the present anticipatory bail application for
orders at 4:00 pm.
(Gajender Singh Nagar)
Special Judge, NDPS
Shahdara Distt./KKD/16.12.2025
At 4.00 p.m.
ORDER
1. Vide this order, the undersigned shall decide anticipatory bail
application U/s 482 BNSS moved on behalf of applicant/
accused namely Sushil Sharma for grant of anticipatory bail.
-- 1 of 4 --
2
2. It is contended by Ld. Counsel for applicant/ accused that the
applicant / accused is the husband of the victim. He is out of India
i.e. in Tanzania. It is contended that he has left India a year prior
to the filing of FIR. He is working there, appointment letter
attached with the application. There are only bald allegations of
offence u/s 498A/406 IPC against him, as such his custodial
interrogation is not required in the present matter. It is pointed out
that in Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar the Hon’ble Supreme
Court has stated that in cases punishable for 7 years or less bail
should be normally granted. It is pointed out that all the offences
in the present case are punishable with less than seven years of
imprisonment. Hence, it is requested that anticipatory bail may
kindly be granted to applicant/ accused.
3. The bail application has been opposed on behalf of the
complainant wife on the ground that the applicant / accused has
not joined the investigation being out of India. Hence, it is
requested that anticipatory bail may not be granted to him.
4. It is apprised by the IO that he had given notice to the accused
however applicant / accused is not coming to India to join the
investigation. Hence, it is requested that his anticipatory bail
application may kindly be dismissed.
5. In rebuttal, It is contended by Ld. Counsel for the applicant /
accused that applicant / accused is employed abroad. He is ready
to join the investigation through VC and he would also physically
come for the investigation as and when he returns to India. Copy
of passport and appointment letter of the applicant / accused has
been filed on record.
6. Heard. Record perused.
-- 2 of 4 --
3
7. In the present matter, FIR has been lodged against in-laws of the
applicant/ accused u/s 498A/406/34 IPC. All the offences alleged
against the applicant/ accused are punishable with imprisonment
upto seven years.
8. In various cases Hon’ble Higher Courts have guided the police
not to make hasty arrest in matrimonial cases. Further, recently in
the case titled as Shivangi Bansal Vs. Sahib Bansal, Transfer
Petition (C) No. 2367 of 2023, decided on 22.07.2025, Hon’ble
Supreme Court clarified that once an First Information Report
(FIR) is lodged under Section 498A, police are barred from
making immediate arrests for a period of two months, unless the
complaint involves serious injuries or offences punishable by
more than ten years. During this period, police will investigate the
matter, and Family Welfare Committees will attempt mediation.
9. Perusal of the FIR shows that mainly the allegations made in
complaint are against other in-laws, there is no serious injury
suffered by the complainant / victim. None of the offences in
question is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven
years.
10. In such circumstances, the applicant/ accused namely Sushil
Sharma, is admitted to anticipatory bail and in case of his arrest,
he may be released on furnishing his personal bond in the sum of
Rs. 20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of IO/ SHO/ Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class/ Link Judicial
Magistrate First Class/ Duty Judicial Magistrate First Class
concerned, subject to the conditions mentioned herein below: -
i) That the applicant/ accused shall join the further
investigation, if any as and when required by the IO or as
directed by the Court;
-- 3 of 4 --
4
ii) That the applicant/ accused shall convey any change
of address immediately to the IO and to the Court;
iii) That the applicant/ accused shall not leave the
Country without prior permission of the Court;
iv) That the applicant/ accused will not induce/ threaten
the complainant/ victim, her family and witnesses or
tamper the evidence, in any manner;
v) That the applicant/ accused shall not indulge in/
commit any kind of activities as alleged against him in the
present case;
vi) That the applicant/ accused shall attend the Court
proceedings regularly.
9. Nothing expressed here-in-above, shall tantamount to any
opinion on the merits of this case.
10. Copy of this order be given dasti to Ld. Counsel for
applicants/ accused persons and to the IO, as per rules.
(Gajender Singh Nagar)
Special Judge (NDPS Act)
Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts
Delhi/16.12.2025
-- 4 of 4 --