Mohd. Yakub @ Salman vs The State (N.C.T Of Delhi)
2020 Latest Caselaw 861 Del

$~36
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                       Date of Decision: 07.02.2020
+       BAIL APPLN. 373/2020 & CRL M.A. 2899/2020(Exemp.)
        MOHD. YAKUB @ SALMAN                         ..... Petitioner

                            Through:    MR. Suraj Parkash Sharma,
                                        Advocate.
                            versus

        THE STATE OF DELHI                           ..... Respondent

                            Through:    Mr. Raghuvinder Verma,
                                        Ld.APP for the state with
                                        ASI Mohan Lal Delu PS:
                                        Narela Industrial Area
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI

                               JUDGMENT

BRIJESH SETHI, J (ORAL)

1. Vide this order, I shall dispose of an anticipatory bail

application filed under section 438 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the

petitioner Mohd. Yakub @ Salman in FIR No. 458/2019 u/s.

186/353/324/308/34 IPC, PS N.I.A.

2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail

on the ground that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely

implicated. Petitioner is not involved in any previous offence.

Bail Appl. no. 373/2020 Page no.1 of 3 Name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the FIR. Petitioner is

ready to join the investigation. It is, therefore, prayed that petitioner

be released on bail in the event of his arrest.

3. Ld. APP for the State has opposed the anticipatory bail

petition on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are

serious in nature. He has provoked Nadim and his family members

for attacking the police party. Ld. APP, has therefore, prayed for

dismissal of the anticipatory bail application.

4. I have considered the rival submissions. As per prosecution

version, police party was attacked while they were going to arrest

one Manish. After seeing the police, Manish had gone inside the

street. He was, however, over-powered and asked to accompany the

police official to the police booth. He, however, refused to do so

and raised hue and cry and called his mother, brothers and sisters

and ran away to one of the house. The police official ASI Ram

Narayan Singh had asked Manish to come out of the house.

Accused Manish had come out of the house with one screwdriver in

his hand. When he was being overpowered by Ct. Vinay Pal,

accused Manish had hit him on his head by the screwdriver. With

Bail Appl. no. 373/2020 Page no.2 of 3 great difficulty, Manish was overpowered and when he was being

taken to police booth, the brother, sister, mother and companion of

petitioner started pelting stones and throwing glass bottles upon the

police officials. When Manish was being taken to police booth,

Nadeem who had a danda in his hand, one fair coloured boy who

had a knife in his hand and sister of Nadeem who has stone in her

hand had attacked the police party and tried to snatch their weapon.

One of the accused had attacked complainant ASI Ram Narayan

Singh with knife on the left side of his stomach. The role of the

petitioner is that he was a member of unlawful assembly and was

also instrumental in provoking Nadeem and his family members

who attacked the police party.

5. Keeping in view the above facts and particularly the fact that

custodial interrogation of petitioner is required, no grounds for

anticipatory bail are made. The anticipatory bail application along

with other application is, therefore, dismissed and stands disposed of

accordingly.

                                                  BRIJESH SETHI, J
FEBRUARY 7, 2020
Ak




Bail Appl. no. 373/2020                                    Page no.3 of 3