Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
SANDEEP VISHWAKARMA @ GOWARDHAN.....Petitioner
For the Petitioner : Mr. Akhilesh Pradhan, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for the
State.
SI Yogesh Kumar & SI Pankaj Kumar, PS Pul Prahlad Pur.
1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.319/2016 under Sections 186/353/307/395/397/398/511/34 IPC and Sections 25/27/54/59 Arms Act, Police Station Pul Prahlad Pur.
2. Charge sheet has been filed and charge against the petitioner has been framed under Sections 186/307/34 IPC. The allegations in the FIR are that the secret information has been received that some people were going to commit dacoity in a factory. On the information a raiding party was prepared. They intercepted one Maruti Swift Car and a Honda City Car and 2018:DHC:4482 BAIL APPLN. 1655/2017 there were 4-8 occupants in the said vehicles. It is alleged that on being intercepted somebody fired from the vehicles on the police party.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that there is nothing to show that the petitioner was the one who is alleged to have fired on the police party. He further submits that as per the FIR no one sustained any injury.
4. The petitioner has been in custody since 02.12.2016.
5. Without commenting upon the merits of the case and on perusal of the record, I am of the view that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail. Accordingly, on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, Petitioner shall be released on bail, if not required in any other case.
6. The petitioner shall not do anything, which may either prejudice the trial or the prosecution witnesses. The petitioner shall not leave the country without the prior permission of the Trial Court.
7. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
8. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J JULY 24, 2018