NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph — Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted)

BAIL APPLN./175/2016 of SARFARAZ AHMAD Vs STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI)

Court
Delhi High Court
Decision date
2016-01-28
Case number
1570 of 2015

Parties

Cites (1)

Statutes cited (2)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+BAIL APPLN. 175/2016SARFARAZ AHMAD..... Petitioner

..... Petitioner

ThroughMr.M.Hasibuddin & Mr.Mohd. Asif,Advs.

versus

STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI)

..... Respondent

ThroughMs.Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with SIRishi Pal, PS Jamia Nagar.Mr.PuneetMittal&Ms.MeghanaAggarwal, Advs. for complainant.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJIO R R%28.01.2016

The present application has been filed by the petitioner under

Section 438 Cr.P.C. for the grant of anticipatory bail in FIRNo.1570/2015, under Sections 384/506 IPC, Police Station JamiaNagar.

In the present case, the allegations levelled are that thepetitioner/accused along with his associates came on the construction

site of the complainant and asked the complainant to stop theconstruction or to pay Rs.5 lacs.

I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel forthe petitioner, learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel forthe complainant.

Apparently, an application for the grant of bail was filed by thepetitioner before the Court of Sessions and he was granted interimprotection. During the pendency of the present petition, status reporthas been filed.

It has been argued by the counsel for the petitioner that in thestatus report, the police has not asked for custody or custodialinterrogation of the petitioner.

In the facts and circumstances, the application is allowed. It ishereby ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall bereleased on bail on furnishing the personal bond in the sum ofRs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction ofthe arresting officer. However, the petitioner is directed to join theinvestigation as and when required. He is directed not to tamper withthe evidence, not to influence the prosecution witnesses and shall not

leave the country without prior permission of the Court concerned.

The application is disposed of accordingly.

Dasti.

JANUARY 28, 2016dd

P.S.TEJI, J