BAIL APPLN./214/2018 of PARAMJIT SINGH @ VICKY Vs THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
Parties
- PARAMJIT SINGH @ VICKY (PETITIONER)
- THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI (RESPONDENT)
Cites (1)
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+BAIL APPLN. 214/2018
PARAMJIT SINGH @ VICKY..... PetitionerThroughMr.InderS.Singhal,Mr.SunilKumar Kapoor and Mr. R.P. Singha,Advs.ThroughMr.InderS.Singhal,Mr.SunilKumar Kapoor and Mr. R.P. Singha,Advs.
versus
THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)..... RespondentThroughMs. Manjeet Arya, APP with SIShekhar, P.S. Gulabi BaghThroughMs. Manjeet Arya, APP with SIShekhar, P.S. Gulabi Bagh
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
O R R%23.03.2018
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has nothingto do with this case. It is not the case of the prosecution that petitioner alongwith main accused Pradeep Nain had robbed the complainant.
Only allegation against the petitioner is that he was in constant touchwith co-accused Pradeep Nain on mobile phone during the robbery. It isfurther submitted that, as per the prosecution, petitioner was in touch withco-accused Pradeep Nain through mobile number [REDACTED].Learnedcounsel for the petitioner submits that this mobile number does not belong to
the petitioner. Charge-sheet has already been filed against Pradeep Nain andtrial is pending.
Keeping in mind the totality of facts and circumstances of this case, itis ordered that in case of arrest, petitioner be released on bail subject to hisfurnishing personal bond in the sum of `10,000/-(Rupees Ten ThousandOnly) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of theInvestigating Officer/Arresting Officer/SHO concerned.
Bail application is disposed of in the above terms. Dasti.
MARCH 23, 2018r.bararia
A.K. PATHAK, J.