Final Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Bail Application No. 831/2023
STATE Vs. SUKHDEV SINGH
FIR No. 109/2023
PS Sarojini Nagar
U/s 308/452/506/120B/34 IPC
08.05.2023
Application u/s 439 CrPC for seeking regular bail
filed on behalf of applicant/accused Sukhdev Singh.
Presence: Sh. Santosh Kumar, Ld. Addl. PP for State along
with IO/ Inspector Shikshit Kumar.
Sh. Sudhir Batra and Sh. Rohit Khanna, Ld. Counsel
for applicant/accused.
Complainant/ injured Rishi Bajaj (through VC).
Reply has been filed.
Brief facts of the case are:-
That on 27.03.2023, a call was received regarding
quarrel at Pakoda Market, Ring Road under jurisdiction of PS Sarojini
Nagar. On the basis of which, DD No. 61A was registered. The
emergency officer (EO) reached at the spot and came to know that
injured has been shifted to AIIMS Trauma Centre. Thereafter, EO
collected the MLC of injured/complainant Rishi Bajaj S/o Sh. Satish
Kumar and recorded his statement. Complainant submitted that he
used to work in the shop of his maternal uncle namely Jacky. He had
some issue with regard to money. On 27.03.2023, complainant was
present at Shop No. 159, Karan Motors, where suddenly Sukhdev @
Sukha along with his 4-5 associates came and started beating the
complainant with kripan and danda. Due to this incident, present FIR
u/s 308/452/506/120B/34 IPC was registered.
It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused
Sukhdev Singh that accused is in JC since 29.03.2023. The nature of
the injuries are simple. The Complainant and applicant/accused are
known to each other and have entered into compromise, which in
FIR No.109/23
U/s 308/452/506/120B/34 IPC Page 1/3
-- 1 of 3 --
writing have already been submitted to the IO/ SI Shikshit Kumar of
PS Sarojini Nagar.
It is submitted by the Ld. Addl. PP for State that
investigation in the present matter is still going on. Further it is
submitted that two anticipatory bail applications of co-accused Jackey
have been dismissed as withdrawn on 29.03.2023 and the other was
dismissed on merits on 06.04.2023. Ld. Addl. PP for State has also
submitted that it is well settled principle of law by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India that in the non-compoundable offence, where
investigation is still pending, there is no question of compounding and
granting of bail.
I have heard the arguments of both the sides.
The complainant appeared before this Court through VC
and was identified by the Investigating Officer/ SI Sikhshit Kumar.
Complainant specifically told the court that there was some
misunderstanding between him and the accused persons which led to
scuffle, in which he sustained injuries. He further informed the court
that as he is related of one of the accused persons namely Jackey (who
is his maternal uncle) therefore, after clearing the misunderstanding he
has compromised the dispute. He has no grievance against the accused
persons.
Considering the above facts and submissions made
before the Court, it is clear that parties have entered into an amicable
settlement. In light of the above and keeping in view of the
observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
Siddharam Saltingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1
SCC 694, it was held that:-
‘personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right and it
should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative to the peculiar
facts and circumstances of the case.’
Thus, it can be clearly said that if the accused/applicant
FIR No.109/23
U/s 308/452/506/120B/34 IPC Page 2/3
-- 2 of 3 --
is released on bail, there is no likelihood of accused to influence the
complainant or misuse his liberty by tampering the evidence. Also the
presence of accused can be secured by imposing conditions. Thus, the
bail application of accused/applicant Sukhdev Singh is allowed. He is
admitted to the bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/-
with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Ld.
CMM/ Ld. MM/Duty MM with the following conditions:
1) That the applicant/accused shall furnish his permanent address to
IO/SHO concerned.
2) That applicant/accused join the investigation, as and when called by
the IO.
3) That applicant/accused shall not leave Delhi without permission of
the Court.
The above observations will have not bearing on the
merits of the case.
Application stands disposed off.
Copy of the order be dasti to Ld. Counsel for
accused/applicant. One copy of the order be sent to concerned jail
superintendent for necessary compliance.
(Aparna Swami)
Bail Roster Judge
ASJ-07/PHC/New Delhi
08.05.2023
FIR No.109/23
U/s 308/452/506/120B/34 IPC Page 3/3
-- 3 of 3 --