Ram vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi
2019 Latest Caselaw 2468 Del

$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                 Judgment delivered on: 10.05.2019
+      BAIL APPLN. 514/2019
       RAM                                             ..... Petitioner
                                  versus

       THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI                       ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner :      Mr. Ajit Nair, Advocate.

For the Respondent:        Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State.
                           ASI Suresh Kumar, PS Inder Puri.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                              JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) BAIL APPLN. 514/2019 & Crl.M.(Bail) 384/2019 (seeking interim bail)

1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.165 of 2018 under Sections 326/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860, P.S.Inderpuri.

2. Allegations in the FIR are that the complainant had a dispute with one Rohit. On the day of the incident, it is alleged that, the complainant was standing outside his factory. Co-accused Mukesh along with his sons Rohit and Vinay came and thereafter started assaulting him. Subsequently it is alleged that petitioner and another

accused came on the spot and also assaulted him. It is alleged that the petitioner gave a glass bottle to the main accused Rohit who broke it and hit the bottle on the complainant.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that even the main accused Rohit had applied for anticipatory bail and contended that he was not present at the spot. He further submits that even petitioner was not present on the spot but was somewhere else.

4. By order dated 27.02.2019, petitioner was granted interim protection subject to joining investigation.

5. Learned APP for the State, under instructions, from the Investigating Officer submits that petitioner has joined investigation and investigation has been completed and charge sheet is in the process of being finalised for being filed in Court and there is no further requirement of the petitioner to join investigation.

6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view of the totality of the facts and circumstances, I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the arresting officer/IO/SHO shall release the petitioner on bail, on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting

officer/Investigating Officer/SHO concerned. Petitioner shall not do anything that may prejudice the investigation, trial or prosecution witnesses.

8. Petition is allowed in the above terms.

9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MAY 10, 2019 st