Kishore vs State
2020 Latest Caselaw 2132 Del

                                                                                            SINDHU KRISHNAKUMAR

                                                                                            09.07.2020 15:06


                                $~7
                                *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                                                              Date of Decision: 8th July, 2020
                                +      BAIL APPLN. 1095/2020 & CRL.M.As.7082/2020, 7083/2020
                                       KISHORE                                              ..... Petitioner
                                                           Through:     Mr. Jujhar Singh, Advocate.
                                                           versus

                                       STATE                                              ..... Respondent
                                                           Through:     Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP.
                                                                        Mr. Hardeep Chikara, Head Warden,
                                                                        Mr. Sunil Kumar, Jail Superintendent
                                                                        and Dr. Jogender Malik.
                                       CORAM:
                                       JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
                                Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been held through video conferencing.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner for interim bail. The Petitioner has been accused of offences under Section 363/302/301/34 IPC. The FIR against the Petitioner was registered on 15th August, 2012 and the Petitioner has been in custody since 18th April, 2014. Bail is sought on the ground of the mental condition of the Petitioner and also in view of the minutes of the High Powered Committee dated 18th May, 2020.

3. The nominal roll confirms that he has been in custody since 18th April, 2014 i.e., for more than six years. As per the nominal roll, his conduct in jail has not been satisfactory. It is due to this reason that the ld. Sessions Judge had dismissed the application for bail on 26th May, 2020. However, when further enquiries were made as to the details of the unsatisfactory conduct of the Petitioner, it was revealed that the Petitioner is suffering from

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATHIBA M SINGH Signing Date:09.07.2020 14:42 a serious Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder and has poor adaptive capabilities and poor frustration tolerance. He gets into frequent quarrels with other inmates and has been under the supervision of the jail psychiatrist.

4. Today, Dr. Joginder Malik along with Jail Superintendent - Mr. Sunil Kumar and Head Warden - Mr. Hardeep Chikara have joined the video conferencing from the jail premises and have confirmed that the mental condition of the Petitioner is not stable.

5. This Court considers the following factors as relevant for consideration of interim bail:

a) Petitioner has been in custody since 2014 i.e., for more than six years;

b) The mental health condition of the Petitioner and the fact that he has suicidal tendencies;

c) Reason for unsatisfactory conduct is thus the Petitioner's health;

d) Out of 21 witnesses, only two witnesses remain to be examined.

e) Petitioner satisfies the conditions for interim bail as prescribed in the Minutes of the High Powered Committee dated 18th May 2020.

In view of the above factors, interim bail is granted to the Petitioner for a period of 45 days from the date of his release subject to the following conditions:

i) A personal bond to the tune of Rs.10,000/- shall be furnished by the Petitioner along with a surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent, Central Jail No.10, Rohini, New Delhi;

ii) There are 21 witnesses, out of which, only two witnesses remain to be examined. The Petitioner shall not contact the remaining two witnesses directly or indirectly or in any manner indulge in any act that may impede

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATHIBA M SINGH Signing Date:09.07.2020 14:42 the trial;

iii) The Petitioner shall provide his active mobile number along with the mobile number of at least one other family member, to the IO and the IO shall keep in touch with the Petitioner and his family on a regular basis during the bail period. The Petitioner shall also provide his residential address to the IO;

iv) The Petitioner shall not travel outside Delhi;

6. The Petitioner shall surrender immediately upon the expiry of the bail period. A copy of this order be communicated to the Jail Superintendent, Central Jail No.10, Rohini, New Delhi. In the meantime, the Petitioner may undergo his treatment in any hospital and if any treatment/care is required, he is permitted to contact the jail doctor as well.

7. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. All pending applications are also disposed of.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE JULY 08, 2020/dk/T

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATHIBA M SINGH Signing Date:09.07.2020 14:42