Final Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Bail Application No. 1684/2024
FIR No.506/2024
U/s 110/126(2)/3(5) BNS
Police Station: Harsh Vihar
State vs. Vakil Ahmad
Video Conferencing is functional.
13.09.2024
Present: Shri Pradeep Kumar, Ld. Addl. PP for State.
Shri Hoshiyar Singh, Ld. Counsel for accused/applicant.
Shri Sumit Verma, Shri Deepak Kumar Tyagi, Shri
Adesh Kumar, Shri Manish Kumar, Ms. Jyoti Sharma,
Shri Shivam Sharma, Shri Subham Kumar, all Ld.
Counsels for complainant.
IO/ASI Nempal in person.
1. This is an application u/s 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C)
seeking grant of regular bail to accused/applicant.
2. Reply filed. Taken on record. Copy supplied.
3. It is the case of prosecution that on 04.09.2024 at about
01:30 pm while complainant alongwith his friend left his house for
visiting Karkardooma Court, co-accused Bilal attacked him with an iron
rod on his head and accused/applicant attacked him with a knife,
causing him injuries.
3. It is stated by Ld. Defence counsel that
accused/applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case by the
complainant as he was not present at the spot at the time of alleged
incident. It is submitted that complainant and his associates attacked co-
accused Bilal in the
gali and no injury was caused either to complainant
or any other person. It is the submissions that accused/applicant has
been undergoing judicial custody since 05.09.2024. Ld. Counsel played
a CCTV footage on his mobile phone showing an incident dated
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
04.09.2024 at about 01:06 pm to assert that accused/applicant did not
participate in the alleged offence. It is also stated that accused/applicant
shall abide by all the conditions imposed by the Court, if ordered to be
released on bail.
4. The application has been opposed by Ld. Addl. PP for
State assisted by Ld. Counsel for complainant and IO arguing that there
are serious allegations u/s 307 IPC against the accused/applicant as he
attacked the complainant with a knife. Ld. Counsel for complainant
played a CCTV footage dated 04.09.2024 at 01:24 pm on his mobile
phone stating that accused/applicant alongwith his son can be seen
attacking the complainant. It is pleaded that bail application be
dismissed.
5. Submissions heard. Record perused.
6. It is observed that the present FIR has been registered
for commission of an offence on 04.09.2024 from 01:30 pm to 02:00
pm. Further, the footage played by Ld. Defence counsel
prima facie
concerns some incident which allegedly took place at 01:06 pm while
Ld. Counsel for complainant played a video wherein the incident
occurred at 01:26 pm. Without going into the question of veracity of the
CCTV footage, it is noted that in the video footage of 01:26 pm,
accused/applicant can be
prima facie seen with co-accused Bilal and
can also be apparently seen carrying a knife like weapon.
7. In the opinion of this Court, complainant has suffered
injury on his head due to the alleged act of accused/applicant as well as
co-accused Bilal. The matter is at the initial stage of investigation
where different aspects of the statement of witnesses are required to be
verified. In such circumstances, grant of bail to accused/applicant may
hamper the remaining investigation. Accordingly, no reasonable or
justified ground to enlarge the accused/applicant on regular bail is made
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
out. The bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.
8. Nothing in the present order shall tantamount to
expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of this case.
9. Application is disposed of accordingly.
10. In compliance of directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court
in case titled
‘In Re: Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail’, Writ Petition
(Crl.) No. 04/2021 dated 31.01.2023, copy of this order be sent to
applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent for information.
11. Order
dasti from Bail Filing Section.
(ARVIND BANSAL)
Additional Sessions Judge-05 (Shahdara)
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi/13.09.2024
-- 3 of 3 --