Full Text
Translation output
$-72 to 74 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 1567/2015 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 7500/2015, CRL.M.A.11039/2015
PREETI WADHWAN Petitioner
Through: Mr. VijayAggarwal, Mr. MuditJain, Ms. Chitali Jain, Mr.Ruchin Midha and Mr. Arjun Taneja, Advs.
Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Malhotra, Advocate
BAIL APPLN. 1567/2015 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 7500/2015, CRL.M.A.11039/2015
PREETI WADHWAN Petitioner
Through: Mr. VijayAggarwal, Mr. MuditJain, Ms. Chitali Jain, Mr.Ruchin Midha and Mr. Arjun Taneja, Advs.
Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Malhotra, Advocate
VERSUS
STATE Respondent
Through: Mr. Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with SI Vikram Singh, PS Punjabi Bagh
Through: Mr. Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with SI Vikram Singh, PS Punjabi Bagh
BAIL APPLN. 1568/2015 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 7501/2015, CRL.M.A.11042/2015
TARANPAL KUNWAR WADHWAN Petitioner
Through: Mr. VijayAggarwal, Mr. MuditJain, Mr. SudhirNandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr.
TARANPAL KUNWAR WADHWAN Petitioner
Through: Mr. VijayAggarwal, Mr. MuditJain, Mr. SudhirNandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr.
VERSUS
Through: Mr. Lovkesh Sawhney, APP forthe
BAIL APPLN. 1570/2015 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 7503/2015, CRL.M.A.11058/2015
2015:DHC:10666 NIRUPAMA WADHWAN Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, Mr. MuditJain, Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr.
2015:DHC:10666 NIRUPAMA WADHWAN Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, Mr. MuditJain, Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr.
VERSUS
Through: Mr. Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
03.08.2015
03.08.2015
CRL.M.A.11039/2015, CRL.M.A.11042/2015. CRL.M.A.11058/2015
Exemptiongrantedsubjectto alljust exceptions.
Applications stand disposed of.
Exemptiongrantedsubjectto alljust exceptions.
Applications stand disposed of.
BAIL APPLN.1567/2015. BAIL APPLN.1568/2015 & BAIL
APPLN.1570/2015
The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in connection with FIR
No.635/2015 (PS Punjabi Bagh) instituted for offence under Sections
406/420/506/467/468/120B/34 ofthe IPG.
They have alternatively prayed for protection till the anticipatory bail applications preferred by them before the court below isfinally disposed of.
Their anticipatory bail applications before the court below could not be adjudicated due to abstention of lawyers jfrom work till date.
The court below has fixed 19.08.2015 as the next date.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that their applications before the court below would become infructuous as they apprehend arrest in the meanwhile. Ithas further been submitted that there isa function inthe family where the presence ofthe petitioners are required.
A preliminary objection was raised by the APP and Mr.Sudhir
Nandrajog, Senior Advocate appearing for the complainant/informant that in the event of the application for anticipatory bail remaining pending before the court below, no interim order could be passed in the present petitions. It was also urged that if at all the matter is urgent, the petitioners would be well advised to seek preponment ofthedate inthecourt below.
In any view ofthe matter, without going into the merits ofthe case, but only considering the circumstances namely abstention of the lawyers from work for a long period, this court is inclined to and directs that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioners till 19.08.2015 when the applications before the court below isfixed for hearing.
Needless to state that the petitioners would not seek adjournment before the court below on any premise.
Let it further be repeated that the interim protection is only till
19.08.2015.
The court below shall consider the applications of the petitioners on its own merits, without being influenced by the fact that interim protection has beengrantedfor a specified periodbythis court.
Thepetitions aredisposed of accordingly.
Dasti. J\ / I ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J AUGUST 03,2015/ab
The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in connection with FIR
No.635/2015 (PS Punjabi Bagh) instituted for offence under Sections
406/420/506/467/468/120B/34 ofthe IPG.
They have alternatively prayed for protection till the anticipatory bail applications preferred by them before the court below isfinally disposed of.
Their anticipatory bail applications before the court below could not be adjudicated due to abstention of lawyers jfrom work till date.
The court below has fixed 19.08.2015 as the next date.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that their applications before the court below would become infructuous as they apprehend arrest in the meanwhile. Ithas further been submitted that there isa function inthe family where the presence ofthe petitioners are required.
A preliminary objection was raised by the APP and Mr.Sudhir
Nandrajog, Senior Advocate appearing for the complainant/informant that in the event of the application for anticipatory bail remaining pending before the court below, no interim order could be passed in the present petitions. It was also urged that if at all the matter is urgent, the petitioners would be well advised to seek preponment ofthedate inthecourt below.
In any view ofthe matter, without going into the merits ofthe case, but only considering the circumstances namely abstention of the lawyers from work for a long period, this court is inclined to and directs that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioners till 19.08.2015 when the applications before the court below isfixed for hearing.
Needless to state that the petitioners would not seek adjournment before the court below on any premise.
Let it further be repeated that the interim protection is only till
19.08.2015.
The court below shall consider the applications of the petitioners on its own merits, without being influenced by the fact that interim protection has beengrantedfor a specified periodbythis court.
Thepetitions aredisposed of accordingly.
Dasti. J\ / I ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J AUGUST 03,2015/ab
JUDGMENT