Akash v. State (NCT of Delhi)

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

2. The application is accordingly disposed of.

3. The present Bail Application has been filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 in FIR No. 354/2024 registered at PS Vasant Kunj, South on 09.07.2024 under Sections 333/110/ 3(5) BNSS,2023.

4. The Anticipatory Bail Application filed before the learned ASJ, has been dismissed vide Order dated 16.07.2024.

5. The petitioner has stated that on 07.07.2024 at about 10:30 PM while his tenant Mohd. Nawaz was at home, he got a call from Satya Prakash, labour of Godown, that a group of 4 to 5 unknown people have come to the scrap Godown and after heated arguments with Hansraj, the group of people started assaulting him. On hearing him, Mohd. Nawaz called Anil, owner of the land, who suggested him to dial 112 and call the police.

6. Mohd. Nawaz called the police and after reaching the spot, he found Hansraj and Vinod Verma in a very bad state. Both the injured were taken to the Hospital while Mohd. Nawaz and Anil remained in the Godown. About 3 to 4 people including Akash and Arun came outside the godown, at about 12 midnight and started abusing Anil. After some heated arguments, the abusers hit Anil him with iron road and wooden stick. Vikas, who was one of the abusers, intervened in between and stopped Akash and Arun. Thereafter, Anil started shouting loudly and on hearing his voice, the neighbours Rajbala and her son came but they both were also beaten by Akash and Arun with iron rods and wooden sticks. Arun and Akash then fled away from that place along with their companions, on their bikes.

7. The police then registered the FIR and the main accused persons were arrested and recovery of two Dandas was effected from their possession. The petitioner had had the apprehension of arrest; hence, he moved the Anticipatory Bail Application before the learned ASJ but the same was rejected by the Court.

8. The Bail is sought on the grounds that there is a delay of two days in the registration of FIR and that he has been neither connected with the main accused nor was he present at the time of the incident, to establish his involvement. The Petitioner has neither directly nor indirectly involved with the commission of the offence and hence, the Anticipatory Bail is sought.

9. The Status Report has been filed on behalf of the State which has been taken on record wherein it is stated that during the investigation, Section 331(6) BNS was replaced with Section 333 BNS and Section 308(2)/324(2) were added. The co-accused Arun @ Neetu came to the Police Station on 12.07.2024 and accepted his crime and was arrested. On his disclosure statement, the present Accused/Applicant/Akash was tried to be traced, but could not be found. On 08.08.2024, the NBW was issued against the Applicant and the proceedings under Section 80, BNSS were initiated, in which the next date of hearing is 10.10.2024.

10. The Anticipatory Bail Application has been opposed on the grounds that the accused is directly involved in the offence and started the quarrel with his accomplices. He is the ringleader of the incident and according to the statement of the injured under Section 180 BNSS, total five persons including a 62 year old lady were injured in the incident. The offence is heinous in nature and the investigation is at the nascent stage. The accused may jump the Bail and not join the investigations as and when required. The other accused persons have also not been arrested and are known to the petitioner. The case property i.e. LED TV and the DVR are yet to be recovered. The petitioner may threaten the witnesses or the complainant and create hurdles in the investigation. Hence, the Bail is opposed by the State.

11. Submissions heard.

12. The case involves heinous crime of forcibly entering into the scrap Godown and demanding money from the labourers and of beating them and vandalizing the property when they did not give the money. The co accused Arun @ Neetu has surrendered himself in the Police Station on 12.07.2024 and has been arrested. He has disclosed in his statement about the entire incident and also the role of the Applicant.

13. There are as many as five persons including a 62 year old lady, who have been injured. The petitioner has been avoiding arrest and even the proceedings under Section 80, BNSS have been initiated against him.

14. Considering the nature of the allegations and that the investigations are still at a nascent stage and case property is yet to be recovered, the Anticipatory Bail, is hereby denied.

15. The Application is accordingly disposed of.