Delhi High Court
Kawaljit Kaur @ Sonia vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 30 August, 2011
Author: V.K.Shali
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLICATION NO.645/2011
BAIL APPLICATION NO.694/2011
Date of Decision : 30.08.2011
BAIL APPLICATION NO.645/2011
KAWALJIT KAUR @ SONIA ...... Petitioner
Through: Mr. D.Ohlan, Adv.
Versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ...... Respondent
Through: Mr.Naveen Sharma, APP
BAIL APPLICATION NO.694/2011
KAWALJIT KAUR @ SONIA ...... Petitioner
Through: Mr. D.Ohlan, Adv.
Versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ...... Respondent
Through: Mr.Naveen Sharma, APP
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be
allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest ?
Bail Appl. Nos.645/2011 & 694/2011 Page 1 of 5
V.K. SHALI, J.(Oral)
Crl.M.B.No.886/2011 in Bail Appl. No.694/2011
Crl.M.B.No.882/2011 in Bail Appl.No.645/2011
1. These are two bail applications filed by the petitioner on
the ground that the petitioner has a daughter aged
around 9 years and that she is suffering from an
ailment/mental disorder. The petitioner's daughter is
presently being looked after by an Orphanage i.e.
Cornerstone Church, J-15 Basement, Vikas Puri, New
Delhi.
2. It has been alleged that the Orphanage is not sending
the daughter of the petitioner to school and therefore,
she would like her daughter to be admitted in some
school if she is granted interim bail.
3. The petitioner has also stated that her daughter is
suffering from a mental ailment and is undergoing
treatment to get it cured.
4. Status report has been filed. SI Rajesh Verma was sent
to verify the facts mentioned in the bail applications of
Bail Appl. Nos.645/2011 & 694/2011 Page 2 of 5
the petitioner. No relative of the petitioner was found
residing at the given address i.e. H.No.WZ-67A, Old
Shahpuira, Tilak Nagar, Delhi. On further inquiries, it
has transpired that the father of the petitioner
Sh.Surinder Singh is living at H.No.326, Street-19, Sant
Garh, Tilak Nagar, Delhi who has stated that after the
arrest of his daughter/the petitioner, he got his
granddaughter i.e. Parampreet admitted in a Life Center
Academy School and put her in Suraksha Hostel. He has
denied that his grand daughter is suffering from any
ailment till the time she was admitted to the school.
5. This fact was also verified by Ms.Vinita Bhalla,
Principal/Director of the Life Center Academy and
Suraksha Girls Home, Satya Niketan, Moti Bagh, New
Delhi that Parampreet was a student of their school from
23.1.2010 till 15.3.2010. She has also stated that at the
time of joining the school, the student was medically fit.
6. So far as the medical record of the petitioner's daughter
is concerned, there is an OPD card bearing No.33284/11
Bail Appl. Nos.645/2011 & 694/2011 Page 3 of 5
dated 24.4.2011 issued by the name of Parampreet
prepared by BSA Hospital, Rohini, Delhi where she is
undergoing treatment from Dr.Satya Dev Dahiya
although the CT imaging does not reveal any
abnormality.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
perused the record.
8. So far as the discontinuation of the studies of the
petitioner's daughter is concerned, the same has been
done more than a year and a half ago, therefore, it
cannot be said that this ground of discontinuation of
studies has arisen now. Hence, there is no ground for the
extension of benefit of interim bail to the petitioner
immediately.
9. Further, the daughter of the petitioner is also not
suffering from any ailment which would necessitate
immediate attention by the present petitioner. On the
contrary, it has come in the report that the petitioner's
father is there to look after his granddaughter.
Bail Appl. Nos.645/2011 & 694/2011 Page 4 of 5
10. It has also been by learned APP that before this also she
has been repeatedly availing of this benefit at a regular
interval on the ground of her daughter. Out of 34
witnesses, 28 have already been examined.
11. I do not find it to be a fit case to exercise the discretion
in favour of the petitioner as I find the bonafides of the
petitioner for grant of interim bail to be suspect when the
case is almost at the penultimate stage.
12. Accordingly, both the applications are dismissed.
V.K. SHALI, J.
AUGUST 30, 2011
RN
