Mukul Jain v. State

O R D E R %

16.11.2016

¶1Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the complainant inform that the petitioner and the complainant have entered into a settlement before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts.

¶2Since the parties have entered into a settlement, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶3It is, therefore, directed that in the event of arrest the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹15,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/SHO concerned further subject to the condition that he will join the investigation as and when directed by the Investigating Officer BAIL APPLN. 996/2016

and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court concerned.

¶4Bail application is disposed of.

¶5Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J. NOVEMBER 16, 2016 'vn'

BAIL APPLN. 996/2016

5# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 996/2016 MUKUL JAIN ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Rajiv Khosla, Mr. H.S. Sodhi, Mr. Tejinder Singh and Mr. Ajeet Tyagi, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP for the State with SI Deepak Kumar, PS Rajouri Garden. Mr. Shiv Charan Garg and Mr. Imran Khan, Advocates for the complainant. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA