Interim Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 1
SC No. 24/2023
State Vs. Nishant Bhagel and ors.
FIR No. 684/2022
P.S. Harsh Vihar
u/s 506/34 IPC
& 3 (1) (r)(s) of SC/ST Act.
25.11.2023.
Present: Sh. Parmod Kumar, Ld. Addl. PP for State.
Complainant in person with Ld. Counsel Sh. Ashish
Kumar.
Both accused present on interim bail.
Sh. Kunal Khanna and Ms. Sonia, Ld. Counsels for
accused Nishant Bhagel.
Sh. Javed Khan, Ld. Counsel for accused Ravi.
Upon service of notice, IO/ACP Jashod Singh Mehta
is present.
Today, this matter is fixed for production of MLC by
the complainant/further arguments on regular bail of accused
persons/consideration on the point of charge.
Complainant has produced one MLC, however, date of
said MLC does not pertain to the date of alleged incident, the same
has been seen and returned.
Arguments on regular bail applications of both
accused persons have been heard.
Submissions heard. Record perused.
Ld. Counsels for applicants/accused persons have
submitted that applicants/accused persons have been falsely
implicated in the present case; that charge-sheet of present case has
been filed without arrest of accused persons; that
-- 1 of 3 --
2
applicants/accused persons have clean antecedents. It has been
further submitted that applicants/accused persons are ready to
abide by all the conditions imposed by the court, if they are
released on bail. Thus, Ld. Counsels have prayed for grant of bail
to the applicants/accused persons.
Per contra, Ld. Addl. PP for State has opposed the bail
applications by referring to the serious nature of offence alleged
against accused in the FIR. It has been prayed that bail application
may be dismissed.
I have heard respective submissions addressed on
behalf of either side and perused the record.
At the outset, it is worthwhile to mention that
charge-sheet has already been filed against applicants/accused
persons ‘without arrest’. Further, accused persons not being
arrested during investigation, is indicative of the fact that accused
persons cooperated during the course of the same with the
investigating agency. Moreover, even if the allegations are
presumed to be correct on the face of it at this stage, then too, the
same are a matter of trial. Thus, considering the fact that charge is
yet to be framed and recording of evidence is likely to take
considerable time, therefore, the applications in hand deserves to
be allowed. Last but not the least, apprehension, if any, on behalf of
prosecution may be allayed by imposing strict conditions on the
applicants/accused persons.
Accordingly, in view of above discussion as well as in
the light of facts and circumstances in totality, accused Nishant
Baghel and Ravi are admitted to bail on furnishing personal bond
in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each with one local surety each of like
-- 2 of 3 --
3
amount to the satisfaction of this court/Duty MM subject to the
conditions that:
1. Accused shall not threaten or influence the complainant or any
prosecution witness in any manner whatsoever.
2. Accused shall not tamper with the evidence nor shall indulge in
any illegal activities during the bail period.
3 Accused and his surety shall intimate this Court immediately of
any change in their addresses and shall also furnish their mobile
numbers to the IO/SHO concerned.
Application disposed of accordingly.
At this stage, Ld. Counsel for accused Ravi has filed
copy of caste certificate of said accused stating that he belongs to
SC/ST caste. Ld. Addl. PP for the State has sought some time to
apprise the court about the further course of action with respect to
the same.
Put up this matter for consideration on the said aspect
as well as on the point of charge on 03.02.2024.
(Vineet Kumar)
ASJ-02/Spl. Judge: SC/ST
(POA) Act/E-Court/Shahdara
KKD/Delhi/25.11.2023.
-- 3 of 3 --