SUNIL AGGARWAL  Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Bail Appln.3906/2020 Page 1 of 10
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: 12.01.2021
Pronounced on: 25.01.2021

+ BAIL APPLN. 3906/2020 & CRL.M.A. 17997/2020
SUNIL AGGARWAL ….. Petitioner
Through Ms.Rekha Aggarwal, Adv.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ….. Respondent
Through Mr.Amit Chadha, APP for State.
Insp.Prem Chandra Khanduri PS
Crime Branch.

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

J U D G M E N T
1. Present petition has been filed under section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking
regular bail in pursuance to FIR No.58/2020 registered at Police Station
Crime Branch for the offences punishable under sections 506/509 IPC &
section 67A of I.T. Act.
2. The case of applicant/petitioner is that he is an American Citizen and
qualified Software Engi neer by profession. He has worked in some of the
world’s biggest organizations on very senior positions. He has his roots in
the society and is not a prior convict. He is a law abiding citizen of the
2021:DHC:266Bail Appln.3906/2020 Page 2 of 10
country and is innocent.
3. Learned counsel for the petit ioner submitted that the screenshot
annexed by the complainant seems to have been taken by herself , thus, are
tampered and forged with an intention to falsely implicate the
applicant/petitioner. The IO has confirmed in his status report that he has
taken a report from WhatsApp officials in which WhatsApp has only
verified that the number belongs to the applicant. The applicant has never
denied that the mobile number belongs to him. He is using this mobile
number for the last 9 years. At the same time, What sApp has not verified
that the alleged status was uploaded from the applicant mobile on
16.02.2020. So there is no admissible facts about the applicant posting the
alleged WhatsApp status. Moreover, the WhatsApp status remains only for
24 hours and gets deleted automatically by the WhatsApp application
thereafter.
4. Further submitted that in order to send and receive status updates, the
contacts must have on each other ’s phone number s saved on the phone’s
address books. However, the applicant was arrested from Dehradun on
16.09.2020 where he is residing continuously for more than one year. The
applicant is in Judicial Custody since 18.09.2020 which is more than 78
2021:DHC:266Bail Appln.3906/2020 Page 3 of 10
days now in JC.
5. In addition to above, it is submitted that the applicant was never
issued any notice under section 41A Cr.P.C. by the concerned authorities
and this has caused grave injustice to the applicant.
6. In the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar , the Hon’ble Supreme
Court held that the IO has to issue notice under section 41A before th e arrest
in the cases where the punishment is less than 7 years. Not even once the
applicant has been investigated or asked to join the investigation for this
FIR/offence, thereby raising reasona ble doubts on the investigation by the
investi gating agency . Moreover, the case property like two mobile phones
and a laptop have already been recovered by the IO at the time of arrest at
Dehradun and has been sent to FSL , however, FSL report is awaited.
Nothing more is to be recovered from the applicant.
7. Learned APP has opposed the present petition by submitting that the
complainant is Judicial Officer in Delhi and the applicant has uploaded her
obscene photographs on whatsapp. Due to this act of the applicant, the
image of the complainant has been tarnished and sh e put to great trauma.
Therefore, keeping in view of the serious allegations against the petitioner,
the petition deserves to be dismissed.
2021:DHC:266Bail Appln.3906/2020 Page 4 of 10
8. It is alleged in the present petition that the complainant Ms.Anu
Aggarwal has gravely misused her official powers for arresting the applicant
with her influence as she at the time of filing of the complaint was the
immediate head of the Crime Branch, therefore, IO and other Crime Branch
officers have obliged her being CMM, Dwarka Courts, Delhi.
9. It is mentioned in the present petition that the applicant and his ex –
wife Meenu Aggarwal have some family dispute and the complainant
Ms.Anu Aggarwal (CMM) is the real younger sister of Meenu Aggarwal.
The applicant got married to Meenu Aggarwal in August, 1998. They went
to USA after marriage in September, 1998. Since then they were residing in
USA only till the year 2011. Two children were born out of the wedlock
and they are now aged 18 years and 15 years. However, sometime in the
year 2011, the applicant alongwith his wi fe Meenu Aggarwal and two
children came back to India and were residing in Mumbai. However, his
wife filed a complaint under section 498A IPC registered at Police Station
Darya Ganj being FIR No.185/2012. The applicant was acquitted b y the
Trial Court in M ay 2019, however, the appeal for said case is pending
adjudication.
10. It is alleged that another criminal case is hoisted on the applicant to
2021:DHC:266Bail Appln.3906/2020 Page 5 of 10
prevent him from going to USA and perusing the litigation there for
children’s custody. The applicant had been co nstrained to file a divorce case
in the Family Court, Tis Hazari, Delhi because of the mental and physical
cruelty committed by his wife and her family. The applicant was granted
decree of divorce on the basis of adultery allegations vide order in 2018.
11. Further alleged that the applicant was also constrained to file a
custody case in the Mumbai Family Court for the custody of his two minor
children and was granted custody vide order dated 27.05.2015. However,
his wife flouted the orders of the Mumbai Fam ily Court and illegally took
away minor children to USA. She gave an undertaking to the Court that she
will not remove the children from the jurisdiction of the court till the case is
decided but she illegally absconded to USA along with the children in t he
year 2014. Subsequently, NBW was issued against his wife Meenu
Aggarwal which is still continuing. She is a fugitive accused within India.
Even the High Court of Mumbai dismissed their application to cancel the
NBW and ordered that she should produce th e children in the court
immediately.
12. Case of the petitioner is that to seek revenge from the applicant, his
ex-wife Meenu Aggarwal and the complainant in the present FIR Ms.Anu
2021:DHC:266Bail Appln.3906/2020 Page 6 of 10
Aggarwal, who is real younger sister of Meenu Aggarwal, hatched a
conspiracy t o frame the applicant in the false FIR mentioned above. The
whole purpose of this malicious FIR is to accede to the unfair demand of the
complainant that all the cases against her sister in USA and India be
dropped/withdrawn so that the sister (ex -wife of the applicant) can travel to
India with the children whose passport cannot be renewed without the
consent of the applicant/father. Moreover, sister of the complainant has got
passport of the minor children by forging the signature of the applicant, for
which the sister of the complainant is facing criminal charges. The signature
forgery complaints against complainant ’s elder sister are still pending in the
American Embassy, New Delhi and with the US authorities in Washington
DC, USA.
13. It is submitted duri ng arguments by learned counsel for the petitioner
that petitioner will not get any relief from the court below, the complainant
being a Judicial Officer . Earlier, a court had rescued to hear the bail
application of the petitioner. Accordingly, prayed to d ecide the present
petition.
14. It is not in dispute that this Court has power to entertain and decide
the present petition.
2021:DHC:266Bail Appln.3906/2020 Page 7 of 10
15. It is worth mentioning here that the photographs annexed by the
complainant are neither nude nor with sexual act, however, frame of p hotos
of complainant are with lingerie .
16. Vide order dated 27.11.2020 passed by this Court in Bail Appln.
No.2866/2020 granted anticipatory bail to Ajay Ag garwal who is brother of
the petitioner by observing as under:
“After sifting through the allegations and material
presented before it, this court finds that the following are
the most relevant for purposes of the present anticipatory
bail application :
(a) On an overall perspective, it is clear that the offence
alleged finds its roots in the matrimonial disp ute
between the complainant’s sister and her ex –
husband, who is the present applicant’s brother. It is
clearly that matrimonial dispute which gives to the
allegations in the subject FIR a very shrill tone and
tenor. There is stated to be an ongoing bitter custody
battle between the applicant’ brother and the
complainant’s sister in relation to their two
children;
(b) It is the accepted position that the WhatsApp number
and account, on and from which, the offending
photographs were uploaded, belongs not to the
applicant but to his brother, who (latter) is the ex –
husband of the complainant’s sister;
(c) In status report dated 30.09.2020 and in order dated
23.09.2020 made by the learned Sessions Court,
dismissing the applicant’s anticipatory bail
application, it is re corded that even the cell –
phones/laptop from which the offending photographs
2021:DHC:266Bail Appln.3906/2020 Page 8 of 10
were uploaded did not belong to the applicant,
which devices have since been recovered from the
applicant’s brother;
(d) It is also not denied that at the time when the
offending pho tographs were uploaded on the
WhatsApp status of the applicant’s brother, the
latter was in Dehradun while the applicant was in
Delhi;
(e) In the FIR there is no specific or pointed allegation
against the applicant except that he alongwith his
brother uploade d the offending photographs on the
brother’s WhatsApp status, though it is not disputed
that at the relevant time the applicant was in Delhi
while his brother was in Dehradun;
(f) There is no contest that the applicant is a family
man, permanently residing in Delhi, and there is no
justifiable basis to believing that the applicant is
either a flight -risk or that the applicant would
impede the investigative process or subvert the
course of law. In any case, the incident complained
of dates back to February 2020 and the complaint,
though inadvertently dated 19.01.2020 was made on
19.02.2020; and between then and now, no serious
effort appears to have been made to arrest the
applicant or to require his custodial interrogation;
(g) As things stand, no meaningful inves tigation is
proceeding against the applicant; though the
applicant’s brother has been in judicial custody
since 18.09.2020. ”
17. In view of the facts mentioned above and the fact that petitioner is in
Judicial Custody since 16.09.2020 and all recoveries have been made and
trial will take substantial time, however, without commenting on the merits
2021:DHC:266Bail Appln.3906/2020 Page 9 of 10
of the prosecution case, I am of the view that petitioner deserves bail.
18. Accordingly, he shall be released on bail forthwith on the following
conditions:
(a) The applic ant shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.1,00,00 0/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with one surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court;
(b) The applicant shall furnish to the Investigating Officer/ S.H.O. a
cell phone number on which th e applicant may be contacted at
any time and shall ensure that the number is kept active and
switched -on at all times;
(c) The applicant shall not travel out of the country without prior
permission of the trial court;
(d) The applicant shall not contact, nor vis it, nor offer any
inducement, threat or promise to any of the prosecution witnesses
or other persons acquainted with the facts of case. The applicant
shall not tamper with evidence nor otherwise indulge in any act or
omission that is unlawful or that would prejudice the proceedings
in investigation or in trial.
19. In view of above directions, the petition is allowed and disposed of.
2021:DHC:266Bail Appln.3906/2020 Page 10 of 10
20. Pending application also stands disposed of.
21. The Judgment be uploaded on the intranet of this Court forthwith.

(SURESH KUMAR KAIT )
JUDGE
JANUARY 25, 2021
ab

2021:DHC:266