IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Surinder Dhall & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. – Respondents
BAIL APPLNSA. 1670 of 2022, 1671 of 2022, 1672 of 2022 & 1738 of 2022
Decided On : 20-04-2023
Anticipatory Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners in a case involving charges under Section 498A/406/354/323/506/509/34 IPC, considering the fact that charge-sheet had already been filed and the state did not seek custody of the accused. The court imposed certain conditions for the bail.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought anticipatory bail in a case under Section 498A/406/354/323/506/509/34 IPC. The charge-sheet had already been filed, and the petitioners were granted interim protection by the court.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the fact that charge-sheet had been filed and the state did not seek custody of the accused. Relying on previous judgments, the court granted the petitioners anticipatory bail and imposed specific conditions.
Issues: Anticipatory bail in a case involving charges under Section 498A/406/354/323/506/509/34 IPC, considering the filing of the charge-sheet and the state's stance on custody of the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the fact that charge-sheet had been filed and the state did not seek custody of the accused, along with the precedent set by previous judgments.
Final Decision: The petitioners were admitted to court bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions including informing the Investigation Officer of any change in address, not leaving the country without permission, providing functional mobile/telephone numbers to the IO, and attending each hearing before the Trial Court.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)--These are the petitions seeking anticipatory bail in Case FIR No. 205/2022 under Section 498A/406/354/323/506/509/34 IPC registered at P.S Pahar Ganj.
2. The petitioners were granted interim protection by this court vide order dated 01.06.2022.
3. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner Nitin Dhall, husband of respondent/complainant had undertaken to pay the school fees of the child in terms of order dated 23.03.2022 in CRL.REV. 207/2022, passed by the court of learned ASJ, Tis Hazari, Central District.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners undertake that the petitioner Nitin Dhall will continue to pay total increased school fees subject to the orders passed in the revision petition.
5. Learned APP has informed that charge-sheet in this case has already been filed and since the charge-sheet has been filed the present petitions have become infructuous and the petitioners may move an appropriate application before the learned Trial Court.
6. Learned counsel for complainant has also submitted that there is an outstanding of Rupees Seven Lakhs. However, Sh. Jatan Singh, learned counsel for petitioner submits that entire amount has already been paid.
7. Similar issue was considered by this court in Bail Application No. 4286/2021 titled as Balan Mani vs. State NCT of Delhi and this court relying upon the judgment in Bharat Chaudhary vs. State of Bihar, [Crl.A. No. 1250/2003] and in Sushila Aggarwal and Others vs. State (NCT of Delhi), [AIR 2020 SC 831] and after taking into account the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed and the state did not seek custody of the accused, this court confirmed the interim order and made it absolute.
8. Taking into account totality of the fact, the petitioners are admitted to court bail in Case FIR No. 205/2022 under Section 498A/406/354/323/506/509/34 IPC registered at P.S Pahar Ganj on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court subject to the following conditions:
a) The applicant will inform the Investigation Officer as well as the Trial Court in the event of any change in his address.
b) The applicant will not leave the country without the permission of the Trial Court.
c) The applicant will give his functional mobile/telephone numbers to the IO and ensure that he is reachable on the said mobile/telephone numbers.
d) The applicant will attend each and every date of hearing before the Trial Court, except where exempted by the Trial Court in exceptional circumstances.
9. The present petition stands disposed of.
The court considered the filing of the charge-sheet and the state's stance on custody of the accused in granting anticipatory bail, along with imposing specific conditions for the bail.
The court considered the likelihood of a lengthy trial and the filing of the charge sheet in granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Grant of interim anticipatory bail and subsequent court bail with specific terms and conditions based on the applicant's cooperation in the investigation.
Continuation of anticipatory bail application is unnecessary once charges are filed without arrest; petitioner can seek regular bail.
The court considered the stage of the trial, the petitioner's conduct, and the complainant's options for seeking protection in granting bail.
The main legal point established is the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving serious allegations, with specific conditions to ensure cooperation in the investigati....
The court's decision was influenced by the compliance of the petitioner with the court's order and the admission by the state counsel that the petitioner is no longer required for further investigati....
The recovery of the disputed amount cannot be a prerequisite for the grant of bail, especially when no custodial interrogation is needed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.