BAIL APPLN./1868/2017 of RAM NIWAS SHARMA Vs THE STATE NCT OF DELHI

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+BAIL APPLN. 1868/2017

RAM NIWAS SHARMA

..... PetitionerThrough:Mr.Sunil Tiwari, Adv. with Ms.PreetiMittal, Adv.

versus

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI..... RespondentThrough:Mr.Hirein Sharma, APP for StateSI Dharmendra Pratap Singh, PS-Samaipur Badli

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA

O R R27.09.2017

This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of thepetitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case FIR No.823/2014, underSections 498-A/304-B/406/34 IPC, registered at Police Station-Samaipur,Delhi.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aninnocent person and allegations alleged in FIR No.823/2014, under Sections498-A/304-B/406/34 IPC, registered at Police Station-Samaipur Badli, Delhiis false. He further submits that the petitioner is the father-in-law of thedeceased and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He has furthersubmitted that when the deceased committed suicide on 31.07.2014, thepetitioner was not in the knowledge of the same. Counsel for the petitionerfurther submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 01.10.2014. Hehas further submitted that trial is not likely to conclude in near future and the

continued incarceration of the petitioner will not serve any purpose andprays that the petitioner be released on regular bail.

On the other hand, learned APP for the State has vehemently opposedthe bail application and has submitted that the allegations levelled againstthe petitioner are very serious in nature. He has further submitted that thedeceased died within period of 1 ½ years of marriage. He has furthersubmitted that the petitioner is the father-in-law of the deceased and there isallegations against him of dowry demand. He has further submitted thatthere is also allegation against the husband of the deceased regarding beatingand torturing the deceased.

What is emerging from the arguments as well as the facts on record isthat the petitioner is the father-in-law of the deceased. It is an admitted caseof both the parties that the petitioner right now is in judicial custody since01.10.2014. Neither any specific role has been attributed nor any specificallegation has been made against the present petitioner in the text messagesent by the deceased. The investigation has already been completed and thepetitioner is stated to be in judicial custody since 01.10.2014. No purposewould be served if the petitioner is kept in judicial custody as the trial islikely to take some time. Consequently, the petitioner is granted bail on hisfurnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety of the likeamount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court below with the conditionthat he shall not influence the prosecution witnesses; he shall not tamper theprosecution evidence and he should not leave India without prior permissionof the Court below.

The present bail application is allowed and disposed of accordingly.However, this order shall not affect the merit of the case.

Copy of the order be given dasti, as prayed.

SEPTEMBER 27, 2017/sr

I.S.MEHTA, J