Delhi High Court
Surjit Manna vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 21 August, 2018
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 21.08.2018
+ BAIL APPLN. 1666/2018
SURJIT MANNA ..... Petitioner
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Tiwari, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for the
State.
SI Prabhanshu, Crime Branch
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
21.08.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioner seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 314/2017
under Sections 381/328/411/34 IPC, Police Station Karol Bagh (now
before the Special Investigation Cell).
2. The allegations in the FIR are that the petitioner, who was an
employee of the complainant, had after the complainant left from his
factory, which was that of making gold ornaments, celebrated the
birthday of his son and gave some intoxicant to the other workers,
after consuming which they became unconscious. In the morning
when the complainant returned to his factory, he found that the vault
etc. were opened and all the workers were sound asleep as if they
were unconscious. On inquiry, it was found that approximately 3.5 kg
of gold jewellery, etc. was stolen.
3. As per the prosecution, the recovery of approximately 1.65 kg
of gold jewellery, 12 kg gold scrap dust mixed and wax and earth, 6
mobile phones and 5.20 lakhs in cash have been recovered from the
petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated and has clean antecedents. He further
submits that the forensic report does not substantiate the allegations
insofar as the offences under Section 328 IPC are concerned. He
submits that the report of the forensic laboratory of the co-workers has
stated that no poison or intoxicant was found. He further submits that
the alleged recovery from the petitioner is suspect.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the
investigation is complete, there is no possibility of the petitioner
influencing the same.
6. The investigation is complete. Charge sheet has already been
filed. Petitioner has been in custody since 11.11.2017.
7. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, on perusal of
the record, I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for
grant of regular bail. Accordingly, on petitioner furnishing a bail bond
in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of the like amount
to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, the petitioner shall be released on
bail, if not required in any other case. The petitioner shall not do
anything, which may prejudice either the trial or the prosecution
witnesses. The petitioner shall not leave the country without the
permission of the Trial Court. The petitioner shall also report to the
SHO of the concerned Police Station on first Saturday of every month.
8. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.
9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
AUGUST 21, 2018
st
