Crl.M.C. No. 3813/2019

Page 1 of 25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

CRL.M.(BAIL) 7673/2020 in CRL.M.C. 3813/2019

Order reserved on : 20.08.2020

Date of decision : 03.06.2021

ABDUL SAMAD

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr.Sarim Naved, Mr.Kamran

Javed and Mr.Anshu Davar Advs.

Versus

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr.B.S.Joon, SPP, Mr. Rahul

Tyagi, SPP with Ms.Aakriti

Mishra, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA

JUDGMENT

ANU MALHOTRA, J.

1.

Crl.M.C. No. 3813/2019 was filed by the petitioner seeking the setting

aside of the impugned order dated 17.7.2019 of the learned Special Judge

(NIA), Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in RC-20/2017/NIA/DLI apart from

seeking grant of bail to the applicant in the said case. Vide the order impugned

in the petition dated 17.7.2019, the joint application moved for

release/discharge in relation to the applicant accused/approver Abdul Samad

and Mahfooz Alam were taken up and in as much as the counsel for the

applicant herein i.e., the approver, Abdul Samad vide an endorsement made on

the application withdrew the application, the said application seeking the

release/discharge from custody in respect of the applicant/approver Abdul

Samad was dismissed as withdrawn.

2.

The Court is presently not considering the merits or otherwise of the said

impugned order dated 17.7.2019 and the present adjudication is in relation to

Crl.M.(B) No. 7673/2020.

2021:DHC:1798

Crl.M.C. No. 3813/2019

Page 2 of 25

3.

Vide the application Crl.M.(B) No. 7673/2020, the applicant has sought

the grant of interim bail during pendency of the petition in NIA Case No. RC-

20/2017/NIA/DLI or for such period as the Court may deems fit. It has been

submitted through this application by the petitioner/applicant that he seeks

release on interim bail on account of the COVID-19 pandemic prevalent in the

country and that at the time of submission of the said application dated

3.7.2020, he had spent 29 months in jail since his arrest and around 26 months

in jail since the date of his pardon, i.e., 16.5.2018. It has been submitted by the

petitioner that the chargesheet mentions 175 witnesses and around 55

documents have been sent to the FSL and that the trial has not even started and

is likely to take a substantial period of time.

4.

It has been submitted through the application, inter alia, that as on date he

being a pardoned person, there is no case pending against him and that he is in

custody only by reason of the bar under Section 306 (4)(b) of the Cr.P.C., 1973.

He inter alia submits through his application itself that the threat to his life and

liberty are real. The applicant, has nevertheless, despite the said submission of

threat to his life and liberty being real, placed reliance on the verdict of this

Court in Bangaru Laxman V. CBI, ILR (2012) II Delhi 102; wherein it has

been observed to the effect:

held in Siddharam Satingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and

others, (2011) 1 SCC 694. In view of the order of anticipatory bail

2021:DHC:1798

Crl.M.C. No. 3813/2019

Page 3 of 25

The applicant has thus submitted that it is his fundamental right to life and

liberty to be released in as much as his statement has been recorded under

Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. 1973 before the Metropolitan Magistrate and no

useful purpose would be served by sending him to custody.

5.

Inter alia, the applicant has submitted that the respondent No.2 is on

anticipatory bail and his statement and that of other prosecution witnesses had

been record and that the present matter does not fall within the ambit of Section

308 of the Cr.P.C., 1973. The applicant further submits that his continuous

incarceration would cause a risk to his life. During the course of submissions

that were made on behalf of the petitioner, it was also submitted that Section

306(4)(b) of the Cr.P.C. 1973, is a provision whi