2017 (5) TMI 1755

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... connection requesting the petitioner to delete Youtube URLs that contained derogatory and defamatory videos of Mrs.Poonam Bhagat Shroff. The petitioner through his company Aiplex, pursuant to the aforesaid request of Mrs.Poonam Bhagat Shroff, deleted the following two URLs from the website www.youtube.com. It is stated that during the said period, the said Mrs.Poonam Bhagat Shroff informed the petitioner about the ongoing divorce petition between her and the third respondent. According to the petitioner, and hence, the third respondent taking note of the fact that the petitioner did work for Mrs.Poonam Bhagat Shroff has filed a false complaint before the learned Magistrate in C.C.No.70/SW/2017 making various imaginary allegations which are....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....7 and the decision of the Delhi High Court in Capt.SATISH KUMAR SHARMA vs. DELHI ADMINISTRATION & Others, 1991 CRI.L.J. 950 wherein it is held that section 438 of Cr.P.C., is wide enough to confer jurisdiction not only to the High Court or the Court of Sessions within whose territorial jurisdiction the offence has been committed and is to be enquired into and tried but also the High Court or the Court of Sessions where a person has reason to believe that he may be arrested in connection with the commission of non-bailable offence. In the aforesaid decisions the High Court of Karnataka and the High Court of Delhi have considered the decisions rendered by various other High Courts on the subject and have held that the jurisdiction relating to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for grant of anticipatory bail. On evaluating the entire material available on record on the touchstone of the parameters laid down in the above decisions, this Court is of the view that grant of anticipatory bail in the instant case would not any way prejudice the investigation, on the other hand, it would prevent harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the petitioner. 5. Hence, dispensing with the notice to the respondent No.3, the petition is allowed with the following order: (i) In the event of the arrest of the petitioner by respondent Nos.1 and 2 or by whomsoever concerned in regard to MECR No.1/2017 registered at Kherwadi Police Station, Bhandra East for the offences under sections 384, 504, 506(II), 120-B of Indi....