The high court of Delhi on Monday allowed the bail application filed by a history-sheeter after it was alleged that the complaint against him was filed by a person who was in the habit of filing frivolous complaints to obtain money from the victims on the pretext of settlement.
The court was hearing the petition filed by the petitioner(Rehan) under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in case FIR No.150/2020, registered at Police Station Jama Masjid for the offences punishable under Sections under Section 387(Extortion)/451(House Trespass)/506(Criminal Intimidation)/34 IPC.
The learned APP has opposed the present petition by stating that the petitioner is a history-sheeter and as many as 31 criminal cases are registered against him. Moreover, when he was on bail in another matter, the petitioner committed offence involved in the present case. Thus, if he is released on bail, he may continue to extort money from innocent people.
On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that complainant is a ‘habitual litigant’ and had filed false and frivolous complaints against the residents of the vicinity for extorting money and despite numerous complaints made by him, even police have not registered any case. He further submits that he used to withdraw the said complaints after getting some amount from victims on the pretext of settlement.
The bench asked regarding the complaints mentioned above which are more than 10 in number, IO stated that he has published one newspaper and he made complaints sometimes regarding encroachment and sometimes regarding police functioning.
The Court allowing the bail Plea said:
“Though, it is not in dispute that the petitioner has 31 cases on him but he was on bail when inflicted in the present case.
Keeping in view the facts recorded above, I am of the view that the petitioner deserves bail.
Accordingly, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court.”
The Court further said that the Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly influence any witness or tamper with the evidence. Moreover, the Trial Court shall not get influenced by the observation made by this Court while passing the order.
Read Order @Latestlaws.com
Share this Document :
Picture Source :
