Arun@Satender v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Delhi High Court · 03 Jun 2022 · 2022:DHC:5943
Talwant Singh
BAIL APPLN. 1218/2022
2022:DHC:5943
criminal appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the petitioner who was only the driver of the vehicle used in the commission of an attempted murder and extortion case, emphasizing his limited role and the grant of bail to co-accused.

Full Text
Translation output
:
$-11 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Order pronouncedon 03.06.2022
BAILAPPLN.1218/2022
ARUN@SATENDER
Through:
, Petitioner Mr. Kamal Pundir and Mr. Durgesh Gupta,Advocates,
VERSUS
STATE(GOVT.OFNOT OFDELHI) Respondent
Through: Mr.RaviNayak,APP with SINaveen Yadav,PS Rohini North.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH TalwantSingh,J.; i
JUDGMENT

1. The bail application has tieen moved in case FIR No. 0171/2022 under Section 307/387IPG registered atPS North Rohini. 1.[1] It has been mentioned.that'the petitioner is a young person, aged 23 years. He is in custody sinceoiHQ|3^ his bail application was dismissed by the learned Tral<^|i!iitt[4].2022.Even earlier,his bail application wasdismissed on25.03.2022. 1.[2] Givinghistory ofthecase,itLasbeerimentionedthatthe complainant had lodged the FIR falsely implicating the petitioner and there is no evidence connecting the petitioner to the commission of offence. He is languishing in custody since01.03.2022. 1.[3] The co-accused,Vijay KantSharma has been already granted bail on 22.03.2022.There are no specific allegations againstthe present petitioner.. Norole is assignedto the petitioner ashe wasnotpresentatthe spotatthe time ofcommission ofthe crime and he has been implicated only on the BAIL APPLN. 1218/2022 Page 1 of[4] 2022:DHC:5943:: basis of an alleged CCTV Footage. Hence,under these circumstances,bail has been prayed.

2. Notice was issued. Status reporths been filed.

3. The version of the complainant as mentioned in the status report is thaton25.02.2022one Arjun SharmaaliasBinny cameto hisjuice shop and told him to pay Rs. 10,000/-15,000/- weekly as protection money. He extorted one gold chain and Rs. 10,000/- from the complainant and he had threatened to come again for collecting remaining amount. 3.[1] On 25.02.2022, Arjun Sharma alias Binny came again to the complainant shop but the complainant was not present. He talked to the complainantover MobilePhone and started firing shotsinthe shop and later on he fled from there. »; 3.[2] During investigation, CCTV Footage was checked. The accused, Vinay KantSharmaaliasVeenu and Arjun SharmaaliasBinny wereshown as entering the shop ofthe cpmpMnaht they fired shots and later on they fled from the spot in a Gar|lilie's^iyiiG^ was driven by the present petitioner,ArunaliasSatendS*. involvedin4similarcases, including the present case.

4. Charge sheet has been filed.|Jid.2.b£ijf^plications ofthe petitioner have been already rejected by the learned ASJ.

5. The grantofbailhasbeen strongly opposed.

6. I have heard the arguments.

7. In this case,the only role ofthe present petitioner is that the main accused,i.e., Arjun Sharma alias Binny along with another aceused Vinay KantSharma had come to the spotin the car driven by the petitioner;later.both ofthem enteredtheshop ofthecomplainantand Arjun Sharmaalias on Page 2of[4] BAILAPPLN. 1218/2022 f: Binny fired shots inside the shop. Thereafter,they used the vehicle ofthe presentpetitionerto escapefrom the spot. 7.[1] The co-accused Vinay Kant Sharma,who had entered the shop along with the main accused, Arjun Sharma, at the time when Arjun fired shots inside the shop ofthe complainant, has been already granted bail by the leamed ASJ. 7.[2] The petitioner is correct in submitting that he was not present atthe spot when Arjun Sharma fired shots inside the shop of the complainant rather he wassitting in his careven asperthe version ofthePolice. 7.[3] No active role has been assigned to him apart from the fact that his vehicle was used by the main accused to reach at the spot and to escape thereafter in the same car.,;

8. Since the charge sheet stands filed and the co-accused is already on bail,Iaminclinedto grantbailtpthepresentpetitioner,whoseroleis much less than the co-accused Vinay KantSharaia. 8.[1] The petitioner be released,!bnyfetailvpji p^^ ofpersonal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with a surety of Mtlfe to the satisfaction of the concerned Court,subjectto thefollowing conditions:

(i) He shall share his Mobile Number with the10 within 3 days ofhis release andkeep his Mobilelocation on atalltimes.

(ii) Heshallnotindulgeinanycrimeduringthependencyofthetrial.

(iii) Heshallmarkhisattendance attheconcernedPoliceStationon lO'"

(iv) He shall notleave the country without permissionfrom theleamed

(V) Heshallnot,eitherdirectly orindirectlytrytothreatenorcoercethe

(vi) He shall appear before Court on each and every date when his matter is listed.

9. The petition is accordingly disposed of. JUNE 3,2022 pa TALWANT SINGH,J CAick here to check corrisendum. ifany BAILAPPLN.1218/2022 Page[4] of[4]