$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 29/2018 ASHFAQ @ ISHPAK CHOUDHARY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Yogesh Swroop and Mr. Alok K. Palai, Advs. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP for State with SI Meetu Yadav, P.S. Sunligh Colony. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK O R D E R % 08.01.2018 Crl. M.A. 288/2018 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. Bail Appln. 29/2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR was registered under Sections 376/363/342/506 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. Prosecutrix had given her wrong date of birth at the time of registration of FIR. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that prosecutrix was above the age of 18 years and was major. Prosecutrix had married the petitioner and thereafter prosecutrix demanded for Khul’a (divorce), which was given by the petitioner. Petitioner had also paid `51,000/- to the prosecutrix vide three separate cheques. Photocopy of the said cheques has been placed on record. It is further contended that photographs placed on record at page 54 show that prosecutrix and petitioner were in relationship. Learned APP has not disputed the fact that during the course of investigation it was revealed that prosecutrix was more than 18 years of age and she had wrongly given her age as 16 years at the time of registration of FIR. Keeping in mind totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, it is ordered that in case of arrest petitioner be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of `10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer/SHO of the concerned police station. Bail application is disposed of in the above terms. Dasti. A.K. PATHAK, J. JANUARY 08, 2018 ga