Kasongo Abimael vs State
2020 Latest Caselaw 820 Del

$~46
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                                  Date of decision: 06.02.2020

+      CRL.M.C. 645/2020
       KASONGO ABIMAEL                                   ..... Petitioner
                   Through:             Mr. Anoop Gupta, Adv.
                          versus
       STATE                                             ..... Respondent
                          Through:      Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, APP for State
                                        with SI Krishan Pal, PS - Maidan
                                        Garhi

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

                          J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

CRL. M.A. 2693/2020

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application is disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 645/2020

3. Present petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the

impugned order dated 22.01.2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions

Judge - 03, District South, Saket Courts, New Delhi in Misc. No. 04/2020,

FIR No. 311/2019 registered at Police Station - Maidan Garhi for the

offence punishable under Section 14 of Foreigners Act 1946.

4. In impugned order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge recorded

that petitioner/ accused is a foreign national, who was booked under Section

14 Foreigners Act for overstaying in India without valid visa and he was

granted bail vide order dated 13.01.2020 on certain terms and conditions

mentioned in the said order. If petitioner is allowed to be released on bail

merely on personal bond or on deposit of cash amount in lieu of surety, there

are scant chances of his being traced out or apprehended in case, he jumps

bail.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that he

produced surety Aditya Talwar with FDR of Rs.50,000/- in his name with

AADHAAR Card. However, surety was not accepted by the Court below.

6. Since sufficient conditions have already been imposed in bail order

dated 13.01.2020, therefore, there is no occasion before the trial Court for

not accepting the surety produced by the petitioner.

7. Learned APP, on instructions from SI Kishan Pal/ IO of the case,

submits that the surety named above is staying with his mother at the given

address.

8. Accordingly, the trial Court is directed to admit the petitioner on bail

on furnishing surety of the aforesaid person without further delay. The

remaining terms and conditions of the bail shall remain intact.

9. The trial Court is directed to make endorsement on FDR which is to

be produced by surety and intimation to the Bank authorities concerned shall

be sent stating that the said FDR shall not be encashed without permission of

the trial Court.

10. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Order dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

(SURESH KUMAR KAIT) JUDGE

FEBRUARY 6, 2020 PB