Yash Rajput vs The State (Govt.Of Nct Of Delhi)
2018 Latest Caselaw 4388 Del

$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                    Judgment delivered on: 30.07.2018

+      BAIL APPLN. 229/2018
YASH RAJPUT                                             ..... Petitioner

                          versus

THE STATE (GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI)                        ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner :      Mr. S.C. Singhal, Advocate.

For the Respondent:       Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for
                          State.
                          SI Vijay Singh, PS Prashant Vihar.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                            JUDGMENT

30.07.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.717/2017 under Sections 186/353/332/279/34 IPC and Section 185 Motor Vehicles Act, Police Station Prashant Vihar.

2. The allegations in the FIR are that the complainant, who is a constable in the Delhi Police, was on night patrolling duty. He found a car being driven in a rash and negligent manner. He tried to stopped the vehicle, however, the driver did not stop. The vehicle was chased and thereafter was stopped after about 100-150 meters. It is alleged

that one of the co-accused was driving the vehicle. The other co- accused and the petitioner got out of the vehicle and started abusing the constable. The constable was attacked with the keys of the car by a co-accused, because of which, the constable sustained injuries. The only allegation against the petitioner is of having used abusive language against the constable. He is not alleged to have been driving or attacked the constable.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the co-accused, who is alleged to have been driving the vehicle and is alleged to have assaulted the constable, has already been admitted to the regular bail.

4. In this petition, by an interim order dated 29.01.2018, the petitioner was granted interim bail. The petitioner was directed to be released on interim bail, on his furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court.

5. The petitioner has already spent over 30 days of incarceration.

6. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the record, I am of the view that the petitioner has made out a case for being admitted to regular bail.

7. Accordingly interim order dated 29.01.2018 is made absolute. The petitioner is admitted to regular bail. The bail bond in the sum of

Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount already submitted in terms of order dated 29.01.2018, shall enure for the regular bail also. The petitioner shall not do anything, which may prejudice either the investigation or the prosecution witnesses.

8. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

9. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

JULY 30, 2018                            SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
st