Tuesday, 28, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Lav Kush vs State
2015 Latest Caselaw 6114 Del

Citation : 2015 Latest Caselaw 6114 Del
Judgement Date : 20 August, 2015

Delhi High Court
Lav Kush vs State on 20 August, 2015
Author: Siddharth Mridul
#8
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                                   Date of decision: 20.08.2015
+       BAIL APPLN. 1576/2015

LAV KUSH                                       ..... Applicant
                            Through      Mr. Brahm S.Nagar, Advocate

                            versus

STATE                                          ..... Respondent
                            Through      Mr. M.S. Oberoi, Advocate
                                         SI Ashok, DIU/SD
                                         Mr. Rakesh Tiku, Sr. Advocate wtih
                                         Mr. Harsh Sethi and Mr. Sumit
                                         Tanwar, Advs. for the complainant


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)

1. The present is a petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 470/2015 under Sections

452/506/336/34 IPC registered at Police Station Fatehpur Beri, Delhi.

2. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 8 th July, 2015. It is an

admitted case that the applicant had not been named in the subject FIR. It is

further admitted that on a complaint filed by one Satbir Singh Tanwar, the

subject case was registered against the six accused persons named in the FIR

namely Jai Bhagwan, Sanjay Bhatti, Sumit Bhatti, Akshay Bhatti, Anil

Choudhary and Himanshu. Along with them, fifteen unknown persons are

alleged to have perpetrated the offence.

3. The registration number of one of the vehicles used in the commission

of the alleged offence was flashed by the police. The applicant was arrested

while driving that vehicle on the date of the incident.

4. Mr. Brahm S. Nagar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

applicant states that the applicant is employed as a driver by Sanjay Bhatti,

one of the named accused in the subject FIR, and had nothing to do with the

assault on the complainant.

5. Mr. Nagar, learned counsel therefore urges that he has been arrested in

the subject FIR only on account of the circumstance that he was driving the

offending vehicle and all the other allegations in the subject FIR do not apply

to him.

6. Mr. M.S. Oberoi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State

fairly concedes that upon investigation, it has been revealed that the

applicant is an employee of Sanjay Bhatti as a driver. Mr. Oberoi further

states that the applicant has been employed as a driver with the prime

accused in the subject FIR for the last three years.

7. An affidavit of Smt. Saroj Bhatti, mother of Sanjay Bhatti has been

tendered in Court certifying the fact that the applicant is employed with her

and her family for the past three years. The same is taken on record.

8. A certificate has also been placed on record issued by Shri Dharampal

Bhati, Vilalge Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Surajpur, Village Bisrakh, Greater

Noida, Dist. Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. stating that the applicant is living in

the house of Mr. Manoj Bainsla for the last three years and he is working as

a driver of Sanjay Bhatti.

9. Mr. Rakesh Tiku, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the

complainant in the subject FIR does not refute this position in view of the

status report filed on behalf of the Police.

10. In the present case, it is observed that the applicant is not wanted in

any other case.

11. There is neither any hint nor allegation that the applicant shall

approach the witnesses in the subject FIR or that he will tamper with the

evidence. The socio-economic status of the applicant who belongs to a small

village in Uttar Pradesh does not give rise to any apprehension in this behalf.

12. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present bail

application is allowed.

13. The applicant shall be released on bail in the subject FIR, subject to

the following conditions:-

(1) that he shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court;

(2) that the applicant shall remain present before the trial court on all the dates fixed for hearing by that Court; and (3) that he shall not meet the witnesses and tamper with the evidence.

14. With the above said directions, the present bail application is disposed

of.

15. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties under the

signature of the Court Master.

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J AUGUST 20, 2015/sd

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter