Full Text
Translation output
$-34 to 41 HIGH COURT OF DELHI (i) CRL.M.C. 4234/2013 & Crl.M.A.15123/2013
VINEET BHATIA & ANR. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Varun Tyagi, Advocate
VINEET BHATIA & ANR. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Varun Tyagi, Advocate
VERSUS
STATE & ORS. Respondents
Through: Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent-
State with SI Kumar Kundan (ii) CRL.M.C. 4235/2013 & CrI.M.A.15126/2013
VINEET BHATIA & ANR. Petitioners Respondents
Through: Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent-
State with SI Kumar Kundan (ii) CRL.M.C. 4235/2013 & CrI.M.A.15126/2013
VINEET BHATIA & ANR. Petitioners Respondents
VERSUS
STATE & ORS.
(iii) CRL.M.C. 4236/2013 & CrI.M.A.15127/2013
CM PRAKASH GOENKA
(iii) CRL.M.C. 4236/2013 & CrI.M.A.15127/2013
CM PRAKASH GOENKA
VERSUS
STATE & ORS.
Petitioner Respondents (iv) CRL.M.C. 4237/2013 & Crl.M.A.15128/2013
OM PRAKASH GOENKA Petitioner
Petitioner Respondents (iv) CRL.M.C. 4237/2013 & Crl.M.A.15128/2013
OM PRAKASH GOENKA Petitioner
VERSUS
STATE & ORS. .Respondents CRLMCs. 4234 to 4241/2013 Page 1
2013:DHC:7434 (v) CRL.M.C. 4238/2013 & Crl.M.A.15129/2013
NIRMAL GOENKA Petitioner
2013:DHC:7434 (v) CRL.M.C. 4238/2013 & Crl.M.A.15129/2013
NIRMAL GOENKA Petitioner
VERSUS
(vi) CRL.M.C. 4239/2013 & Crl.M.A.15130/2013 OM PRAKASH GOENKA Petitioner
VERSUS
(vii) CRL.M.C. 4240/2013 & CrI.M.A.15131/2013
VERSUS
(viii) CRL.M.C. 4241/2013 & Crl.M.A.15132/2013
VERSUS
STATE & ORS. .Respondents CRLMCs. 4234 to 4241/2013 Page 2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
07.10.2013 In the above-captioned eight petitions, cancellation of interim pre-arrest bail granted to second accused-Daryao Singh, Sanjay Dahiya and Sunil Dahiya in FIRs No.29/2010; 65/2010 &
66/2010 for the offences under Sections 406/409/420/120B of IPC registered at P.S. Economic Offence Wing, Delhi is sought by petitioners on merits.
With the consent of the learned counsel for parties, these eight petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order as the grounds oh which cancellation of interim pre-arrest bail is sought, are identical.
During the course of the hearing, it was submitted that now the matter is pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge for 18""
November, 2013. It was further submitted that interim pre-arrest bail granted to xQ?,^ondQnts,laccused-Daryao Singh, Sanjay Dahiya and Sunil
^ Dahiya in FIRs in question is continuing since long and a petition for quashing of FIRs in question is pending before this Court for 13"^
November, 2013. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State had submitted that perhaps due to pendency of aforesaid quashing petition, interim protection granted to respondents-accw^et:/ stands extended till 13"^ November, 2013.
CRLMCs. 4234 to4241/2013 Page3 Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order, FIRs in question and the material on record, I find that instead of entertaining these petitions, it would be appropriate that the petition seeking quashing of FIRs in question is heard and decided on the date fixed. Such a course is being adopted as it is brought to the notice of this Court that there is an order in the petition seeking quashing of the aforesaid FIRs in question that no coercive steps are to be taken against petitioners-accM^e^/ in the aforesaid FIRs.
The above-captioned eight petitions and the applications are accordingly disposed of while refraining to comment upon merits lest it may prejudice either side at the hearing of petition in which quashing of
FIRs is sought.
(SUNIL GAUR)
Judge OCTOBER 07,2013 s CRLMCs. 4234 to 4241/2013 Page 4
07.10.2013 In the above-captioned eight petitions, cancellation of interim pre-arrest bail granted to second accused-Daryao Singh, Sanjay Dahiya and Sunil Dahiya in FIRs No.29/2010; 65/2010 &
66/2010 for the offences under Sections 406/409/420/120B of IPC registered at P.S. Economic Offence Wing, Delhi is sought by petitioners on merits.
With the consent of the learned counsel for parties, these eight petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order as the grounds oh which cancellation of interim pre-arrest bail is sought, are identical.
During the course of the hearing, it was submitted that now the matter is pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge for 18""
November, 2013. It was further submitted that interim pre-arrest bail granted to xQ?,^ondQnts,laccused-Daryao Singh, Sanjay Dahiya and Sunil
^ Dahiya in FIRs in question is continuing since long and a petition for quashing of FIRs in question is pending before this Court for 13"^
November, 2013. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State had submitted that perhaps due to pendency of aforesaid quashing petition, interim protection granted to respondents-accw^et:/ stands extended till 13"^ November, 2013.
CRLMCs. 4234 to4241/2013 Page3 Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order, FIRs in question and the material on record, I find that instead of entertaining these petitions, it would be appropriate that the petition seeking quashing of FIRs in question is heard and decided on the date fixed. Such a course is being adopted as it is brought to the notice of this Court that there is an order in the petition seeking quashing of the aforesaid FIRs in question that no coercive steps are to be taken against petitioners-accM^e^/ in the aforesaid FIRs.
The above-captioned eight petitions and the applications are accordingly disposed of while refraining to comment upon merits lest it may prejudice either side at the hearing of petition in which quashing of
FIRs is sought.
(SUNIL GAUR)
Judge OCTOBER 07,2013 s CRLMCs. 4234 to 4241/2013 Page 4
JUDGMENT