Anmol v. The State

Delhi High Court · 28 Apr 2022 · 2022:DHC:5971
Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
BAIL APPLN.3822/2021
2022:DHC:5971
criminal bail_denied

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's bail application in a robbery case involving firearm use, holding that the gravity of the offence and apprehension at the spot precluded bail.

Full Text
Translation output
i t $-16 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN.3822/2021
ANMOL Petitioner [ Through; Mr.Ravindra Singh and Mr.Amit
I Saxena,Advocates.
VERSUS
I THE STATE Respondent I Through: Ms.Rajni Gupta,APP for the State
I CORAM:
JUDGMENT

1 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA 1 ORDER % 28.04.2022

1. The present application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in FIR No.253/2020, under Sections 392/394/397/411/34 I.P.C. read with Sections 25/54/59 Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station: GTB Enclave,Delhi.

2. In brief, as per the case of the prosecution, on 26.07.2020 at about 12:40 PM when the complainant reached at service road near Gate No.l, GTB Hospital, two boys on a motorcycle stopped the bike in front of the complainant. Thereafter, they assaulted the complainant and put a country 1: / made pistol under left ear ofthe complainant. Further,rider ofthe motorcycle robbed the mobile phone belonging to the complainant. However, complainant caught the rider ofthe motorcycle and raised noise, on which the pillion rider was apprehended by the police. The rider of the motorcycle was identified as Anmol (i.e. the petitioner) while the pillion rider was identified as Rahul.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused/petitioner has been falsely implicated. It is also submitted that there is unexplained delay since the incident took place at 12:40 p.m. while the information was 2022:DHC:5971 received by the police at01:04;15 PM.

4. I have given considered thoughtto the contentions raised. Admittedly, the applicant was apprehended atthe spot.There was no enmity between the complainant and the petitioner/accused, which rules out any false implication. There does not appear to be any inordinate delay as contended by learned counsel for the petitioner. Considering the gravity ofthe offence, no grounds for bail are made out.The bail application is accordingly dismissed. A copy of this order be forwarded to learned trial court for information. 1 \ 1^ \ ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA,J.