$-18 & 20 to 22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 864/2011 RAM KRISHAN GUPTA Petitioner versus STATE OF NCT, DELHI & ANOTHER Respondent AND + BAIL APPLN. 866/2011 ASHISH GUPTA Petitioner versus STATE OF NCT, DELHI & ANOTHER Respondent AND ^0 + BAILAPPLN. 867/2011 SURESH GUPTA Petitioner versus STATE OF NCT, DELHI & ANOTHER Respondent AND + BAIL APPLN. 868/2011 SNEH LATA GUPTA Petitioner versus STATE OF NCT, DELHI 8cANOTHER Respondent Present: Mr. P.D. Gupta, Advocate with Mr. Kamal Gupta, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP for the State. ^ CORAM: ^ HON'BLEMR. JUSTICEG. P. MITTAL ORDER % 15.06.2011 Crl. MA No.7233/2011 (exemption) in BAIL APPLN. 864/2011 Crl. MA No.7235/2011 (exemption) in BAIL APPLN. 866/2011 Crl. MA No.7236/2011 (exemption) in BAIL APPLN. 867/2011 Crl. MA No.7237/2011 (exemption) in BAIL APPLN. 868/2011 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Applications stand disposed of. BAIL APPLN. 864/2011 BAIL APPLN. 866/2011 BAIL APPLN. 867/2011 BAIL APPLN. 867/2011 Notice. Mr. Manoj Ohri, AFP accepts notice on behalf of the State. It is contended that the FIR has been registered under Section 323/307/498A/504 /506 IPC read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Sihani Gate, Gh^iabad, U.P. not on the complaint made by the victim or her father but by her uncle. The Petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case including Ram Krishan Gupta, who is aged about 85 years and is the maternal grandfather (Nand) of the husband of Mrs. y Ruchi. In the facts and circumstances, the applications are allowed. The Petitioners are directed to be admitted to transit/interim bail for a period of 15 (fifteen) days w.e.f. today i.e. 15^'^June,2011. Thisperiodof15 days cometo an end on 3O^''June,2011. In the event of their arrest, the Petitioners be admitted to bail on their furnishing Personal Bond in the sum of ? 25,000/- each with one Surety in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the lO/SHO concerned so as to enable the Petitioners to apply for bail to the Court of competent jurisdiction/to take appropriate remedy. Dasti. G. P. MITTAL ^ (VACATIONJUDGE) JUNE 15,2011 vk