Full Text
Translation output
/ $-23 to 26 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 1059/2019
ASHA .... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Mr. Hemant Chauhan, Mr. Munesh Chauhan and Mr. Sharad Singh, Advs.
BAIL APPLN. 1059/2019
ASHA .... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Mr. Hemant Chauhan, Mr. Munesh Chauhan and Mr. Sharad Singh, Advs.
VERSUS
STATE(GNCT OF DELHI) Respondent
Through: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with W/ASI Usha Devi,P.S. Mundka.
Through: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with W/ASI Usha Devi,P.S. Mundka.
AND
BAIL APPLN. 1062/2019
DEEPANSHU Petitioner Advs.
DEEPANSHU Petitioner Advs.
VERSUS
W/ASI Usha Devi,P.S. Mundka.
AND
AND
BAIL APPLN. 1061/2019
HIMANSHU Petitioner Advs.
HIMANSHU Petitioner Advs.
VERSUS
W/ASI Usha Devi,P.S.Mundka.
AND
AND
BAIL APPLN. 1063/2019
RAJENDER Petitioner 2019:DHC:7371 r Advs.
RAJENDER Petitioner 2019:DHC:7371 r Advs.
VERSUS
W/ASI Usha Devi,P.S.Mundka.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K.PATHAK
26.04.2019 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that complainant is their neighbour. On 14.03.2019 at about 11:30 pm complainant's father quarrelled with Himanshu wherein he gave knife blows to Himanshu resulting injuries to him. Himanshu got the FIR No. 105/2019 registered at police station Mundka on 15.03.2019 against the father of complainant.
Father of the complainant was arrested. It is further submitted that as a counter blast,presentFIR No.132/2009 has been lodged by the complainant alleging therein that petitioners, armed with axe, hammer, baseball bat and knife, had forcibly entered in her house and attacked them; they also torn clothes ofher mother,inasmuch as, molested her. It is further submitted that present FIR was got registered by the complainant on 02.04.019 in respect ofthe incident dated 14.03.2019. There is delay in lodging the present FIR which has been lodged as a counter blastto the FIR lodged by Himanshu on
A
15.03.2019 itself,that is,immediately after the incident. As per petitioners, the incident took place in the street as well as in their house. However, complainanthasshown the incidentto had taken place in her house.
Learned APP, who is assisted by the counsel for the complaint, has opposed the grant ofanticipatory bail to the petitioners. It is contended that petitioners had forcibly entered in the house ofcomplainant on 14.03.2019 and attacked them. However, during the course of hearing, it is admitted that no complaint was made by the complainant in the police station till
20.03.2019regardingthe above-mentioned incident.
Keeping in mind totality ofthe facts and circumstances ofthis case,it is ordered that in case of arrest petitioners be released on bail, subject to their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ^20,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting
Officer/Investigating Officer/SHO ofthe concerned police station.
Above noted bail applications are disposed of in the above terms.
Miscellaneous applications are disposed ofas infructuous.
Dasti.
A.K.PATHAK,J.
APRIL 26,2019/ga
26.04.2019 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that complainant is their neighbour. On 14.03.2019 at about 11:30 pm complainant's father quarrelled with Himanshu wherein he gave knife blows to Himanshu resulting injuries to him. Himanshu got the FIR No. 105/2019 registered at police station Mundka on 15.03.2019 against the father of complainant.
Father of the complainant was arrested. It is further submitted that as a counter blast,presentFIR No.132/2009 has been lodged by the complainant alleging therein that petitioners, armed with axe, hammer, baseball bat and knife, had forcibly entered in her house and attacked them; they also torn clothes ofher mother,inasmuch as, molested her. It is further submitted that present FIR was got registered by the complainant on 02.04.019 in respect ofthe incident dated 14.03.2019. There is delay in lodging the present FIR which has been lodged as a counter blastto the FIR lodged by Himanshu on
A
15.03.2019 itself,that is,immediately after the incident. As per petitioners, the incident took place in the street as well as in their house. However, complainanthasshown the incidentto had taken place in her house.
Learned APP, who is assisted by the counsel for the complaint, has opposed the grant ofanticipatory bail to the petitioners. It is contended that petitioners had forcibly entered in the house ofcomplainant on 14.03.2019 and attacked them. However, during the course of hearing, it is admitted that no complaint was made by the complainant in the police station till
20.03.2019regardingthe above-mentioned incident.
Keeping in mind totality ofthe facts and circumstances ofthis case,it is ordered that in case of arrest petitioners be released on bail, subject to their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ^20,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting
Officer/Investigating Officer/SHO ofthe concerned police station.
Above noted bail applications are disposed of in the above terms.
Miscellaneous applications are disposed ofas infructuous.
Dasti.
A.K.PATHAK,J.
APRIL 26,2019/ga
JUDGMENT