Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 481/2017
AMIT BANSAL Petitioner Tlirough: Mr.Ramesh Gupta Senior Advocate with Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate
BAIL APPLN. 481/2017
AMIT BANSAL Petitioner Tlirough: Mr.Ramesh Gupta Senior Advocate with Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate
VERSUS
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Respondent
Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State Mr. D.S. Paweriya and Mr. Gaurav, Advocates for complainant.
Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State Mr. D.S. Paweriya and Mr. Gaurav, Advocates for complainant.
BAIL APPLN. 489/2017
PRAMOD @ RINKU Petitioner
Through: Mr.Ramesh Gupta Senior Advocate with Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate
PRAMOD @ RINKU Petitioner
Through: Mr.Ramesh Gupta Senior Advocate with Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate
VERSUS
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Respondent . Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the
State Mr. D.S. Paweriya and Mr. Gaurav, Advocates for complainant.
State Mr. D.S. Paweriya and Mr. Gaurav, Advocates for complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
06.08.2018 Both these applications were presented in March 2017 seeking anticipatory bail in relation to the pending investigation in FIR No.57/2017 of Police Station North Rohini involving offences punishable under Sections
328/342/354C/34 of Indian Penal Code,1860, petitioner Pramod alias Rinku being the husband ofthe complainant and petitioner Amit Bansal being his
06.08.2018 Both these applications were presented in March 2017 seeking anticipatory bail in relation to the pending investigation in FIR No.57/2017 of Police Station North Rohini involving offences punishable under Sections
328/342/354C/34 of Indian Penal Code,1860, petitioner Pramod alias Rinku being the husband ofthe complainant and petitioner Amit Bansal being his
BAIL APPLN. 481/2017 Page 1of3
2018:DHC:8192 w friend. By the orderspassed separately on these applications on 20.03.2017 protection against arrest was granted till next date i.e. 24.07.2017 subject to the conditions that the petitioners would handover their respective mobile phone instruments, join investigation on such dates as and when called for, and not make contact with or try to influence any witness or tamper evidence. The interim order has been extended from time to time and continues to operate till date.
In the meanwhile, it has been submitted by the senior counsel for the petitioners and confirmed by the Additional Public Prosecutor, as also counsel for the complainant, that the investigation has been completed and report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. seeking prosecution, inter alia, against the two petitioners herein has already been filed before the Court of
Metropolitan Magistrate who has taken cognizance there upon and has issued process. It was further submitted that the petitioners in terms ofthe said summoning order have been called upon to appear before the
Magistrate today. Though it is submitted on behalf of petitioner Amit
Bansal that he has not been formally served, learned senior counsel fairly conceded that he having knowledge of the summoning order would be obliged and be ready and willing to appear on his own before the
Metropolitan Magistrate.
In the above facts and circumstances, it would be proper that the request ofthe petitioners for being enlarged on regular bail in criminal case arising out of the aforementioned FIR be considered by the concerned
Metropolitan Magistrate where the petitioners, upon appearance, would be filing applications for such release on regular bail. In this view, it is directed
2018:DHC:8192 w friend. By the orderspassed separately on these applications on 20.03.2017 protection against arrest was granted till next date i.e. 24.07.2017 subject to the conditions that the petitioners would handover their respective mobile phone instruments, join investigation on such dates as and when called for, and not make contact with or try to influence any witness or tamper evidence. The interim order has been extended from time to time and continues to operate till date.
In the meanwhile, it has been submitted by the senior counsel for the petitioners and confirmed by the Additional Public Prosecutor, as also counsel for the complainant, that the investigation has been completed and report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. seeking prosecution, inter alia, against the two petitioners herein has already been filed before the Court of
Metropolitan Magistrate who has taken cognizance there upon and has issued process. It was further submitted that the petitioners in terms ofthe said summoning order have been called upon to appear before the
Magistrate today. Though it is submitted on behalf of petitioner Amit
Bansal that he has not been formally served, learned senior counsel fairly conceded that he having knowledge of the summoning order would be obliged and be ready and willing to appear on his own before the
Metropolitan Magistrate.
In the above facts and circumstances, it would be proper that the request ofthe petitioners for being enlarged on regular bail in criminal case arising out of the aforementioned FIR be considered by the concerned
Metropolitan Magistrate where the petitioners, upon appearance, would be filing applications for such release on regular bail. In this view, it is directed
BAILAPPLN. 481/2017 Page 2of3 that the interim protection granted in favour of the petitioners by earlier orders will inure in their favour till decision is taken by the Metropolitan
Magistrate on their respective applications for release on regular bail which may be presented, within a week hereof.
Needless to add, the Magistrate will also give opportunity to the complainant to make her submissions through counsel at the time of consideration of such bail applications, this in addition to the public prosecutor representing the State.
With above observations and directions, both the applications are disposed of.
Dasti to all sides under signature ofCourt Master.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
AUGUST 06, 2018
Magistrate on their respective applications for release on regular bail which may be presented, within a week hereof.
Needless to add, the Magistrate will also give opportunity to the complainant to make her submissions through counsel at the time of consideration of such bail applications, this in addition to the public prosecutor representing the State.
With above observations and directions, both the applications are disposed of.
Dasti to all sides under signature ofCourt Master.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
AUGUST 06, 2018
BAIL APPLN. 481/2017 Page 3of3
JUDGMENT