Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
TALWANT SINGH
Mohd. Azharuddin – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details regarding the fir and the allegations. (Para 1) |
| 2. status of investigation and arrests. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments presented for and against bail. (Para 5) |
| 4. court's reasoning for granting bail. (Para 6) |
| 5. conclusion and granting of bail. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Talwant Singh, J. This is an application for regular bail in case FIR No. 524/2020 under Sections 395/482/412/201/120B/174A IPC and Section 24/27 of Arms Act, PS Neb Sarai. It has been submitted that charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and matter is stated to be pending for taking cognizance and for committal to the Sessions Court. The cognizance is being delayed because necessary sanction under Section 39 of the Arms Act has not been obtained and FSL report has not been filed on record.
1.1. The case, as detailed in the FIR is that on 09.12.2020, some 6-7 unknown persons forcibly entered house of the complainant and all of them were wearing masks and gloves and the said accused persons took away Rs.4 lakhs in cash, 4 gold chains, 2.5 kg silver, one bracelet and one digital camera and one of them was also carrying a gun.
1.2. During investigation, co-accused namely Arman Malik was arrested
Bail may be granted even in serious allegations when the accused has no criminal history, investigation is complete, and co-accused have been released on bail, emphasizing fair trial rights.
Court inclined to grant bail to present accused/applicant on execution of personal bond with one surety of the like amount subject to conditions.
An accused should not be detained solely based on past convictions; parity with co-accused granted bail is a valid ground for bail application.
The principle of parity with other co-accused, completion of previous sentences, and progress in the examination of a main witness influenced the court's decision to grant bail.
Bail is unjustified when there is prima facie evidence linking the accused to a serious crime, particularly in the context of an illegal arms syndicate.
The court emphasized that the duration of judicial custody, personal circumstances including care of minor children, and the nature of prior complaints against law enforcement officials are pivotal i....
The court ruled that mere pendency of multiple criminal cases cannot be the sole basis for denial of bail, emphasizing that the purpose of bail is to ensure the accused's presence during trial.
The decision highlighted the importance of considering the prolonged custody of the accused, the lack of progress in the trial, and the absence of incriminating evidence in granting regular bail.
The court considered the nature of the allegation, the length of time the applicant had been in custody, and the possibility of delay in the conclusion of the trial in granting bail to the applicant.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
