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

BAIL APPLN./2791/2015 of RAMBIR SINGH Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Court
Delhi High Court
Decision date
2017-05-19
Case number
454 of 2015

Parties

Cites (0 resolved of 1 detected)

1 case citation detected in this judgment's own text, but none resolved to a judgment page in this build yet.

Statutes cited (4)

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. 2791/2015

RAMBIR SINGH

..... Petitioner

Represented by: Mr. S.K. Rai, Adv.

versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

..... Respondent

Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP with ACP Amit Goel, Insp. Arvind Kumar, SI Sunil Kumar PS Govind Puri.

CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R R10.03.2017

By this petition the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.454/2015 under Sections 3(1)(x) of SC ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 (in short the Act) read with Section 323/341/354/34 IPC registered at PS Govind Puri.

Though in view of the bar under Section 18 of the Act no anticipatory bail application lies, however since the case of the petitioner was that no role was attributed to him, notice was issued in the present petition.

Status report has been filed by the investigating officer stating that charge-sheet and supplementary charge-sheet have been filed before the learned Trial Court and in the same the petitioner has not been kept in BAIL APPLN. 2791/2015 page 1 of 2

column No.11 but in column No.12 as there was no evidence for the trial of the petitioner for the offences alleged. Since the Police has no evidence against the petitioner for the alleged offence and they are not arresting the petitioner, there is no apprehension of arrest.

In case the learned Trial Court proceeds to summon the petitioner for any of the offences alleged, the same would have to be by speaking order where after fresh cause of action would arise in favour of the petitioner against which he would have his remedies.

Petition is dismissed as infructuous.

MARCH 10, 2017 ‘ga’

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

BAIL APPLN. 2791/2015