PUNI v. STATE

H-
2& 15 • ^ the HIGH COURT OF nrr m mmPPLNus^jj ® DELHI
+
PUNI

STATB^
; Mr. Mukesh Gupta
' P"Wic Prosecuto^ f
MIL4plnU867^ State ' '^^"espo„de„,_
(MONI) i sr

state
Th'-fugh: Mr. Mukesh Gupta
Public ProsecutTf
State ^^^^^^^^spondent-
^SHQDA:
Through: ^]Vfr.
Advocate

Through;
Vatsyan
Petiti am, loner
7^0/7Application, :ss:z-BSSS
Mr. Mukesh Gupta
Public ProsecZ f
State respondent-
Page]
2013:DHC:6900
0/
/(> i

HON'BLEmr..niSTlGESMVILgaDR i .'^K.in.K j 22.11.2013
^bovecaptiojedthreepetitionsaJeta'c™Wy f
^o. 279/2013,. under Sections 341/308/506/34 oUhelpc
P0l.ce stationjR.K. Puram, NewDelhi and th . " been filedland that the injured has bee H' , is notIdisputed by learned , hospital. respondent-Stale. "lonal Public Prosecutor for
Without commenting upon the merits of th
-P"oned three applications are allowed „1 applications are allowed and T
Skr^ Lu.„an. Mohini @Moni of
Yashoda, ^ifeofShriJoginderKwrm, "°fShn Sharvan Kumar &
°n their furnishing bail bondin th '
^ ^^ondintJiesumof ^25 000/ . • surety each ofthe limeamount to th •r ' above cantio 7. " '
NOVEMBER 22,2013 bZu ^°-1867/20i3
"IIApplication Ho.1849/2013
(St/NIL GAUR)
JUDGE
Page 2
2013:DHC:6900