BAIL APPLN./734/2019 of PRASHANT TANWAR Vs THE STATE ( NCT OF DELHI)
Parties
- PRASHANT TANWAR (PETITIONER)
- THE STATE (NOT 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
$~6&7*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+BAIL APPLN. 734/2019*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+BAIL APPLN. 734/2019
PRASHANT TANWAR
Petitioner
Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. withMr.Surender Kumar andMr.Aditya Awasthi, Advs.
versus
THE STATE (NOT OF DELHI)
OF DELHI) DELHI) RespondentThrough: Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, APPwith SI Amit, PS Moti Nagar,Delhiwith SI Amit, PS Moti Nagar,Delhi
+BAIL APPLN. 988/2019
GAURAV TANWAR & ORS
& ORS ORS •••• PetitionersThrough: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. withMr.Surender Kumar andMr.Aditya Awasthi, Advs.
versus
THE STATE (NOT OF DELHI)
OF DELHI) DELHI) _ RespondentThrough: Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, APPwith SI Amit, PS Moti Nagar,Delhiwith SI Amit, PS Moti Nagar,Delhi
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
ORDER
o/o 07.08.2019
1. I Fresh status report stands filed.2. Learned APP for the State, on. the query of the Court, oninstructions, submitted that the petitioners have joined the2. Learned APP for the State, on. the query of the Court, oninstructions, submitted that the petitioners have joined the
investigation. Learned APP further submitted that on the last date ofhearing, learned counsel for the petitioners produced CCTV footageof the said incident in which complainant was seen on the spot but nohad taken and the CCTV of the incident wasquarrel place footage analyzed by the concerned Investigating Officer (10) and the spot wasalso visited by the 10 for verifying the facts.
3. Learned APP, on instructions, further submitted that thestatements of witnesses have been recorded and stated thateye they the complainant injured himself voluntarily on the day of the incident.Learned APP further submitted that the petitioners are not required foicustodial interrogation.
4. In view of the aforesaid facts, the anticipatory bail applicationsof the accused are allowed and it is directed that in case of the an-estof the petitioners, they be released on bail subject to their furnishingpersonal bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety in thelike amount to the satisfaction of SHO/IO. The petitioners shall cooperate and join the investigation as and when called by the SHO/IOin writing. Petitioners shall also not prejudice the investigation,tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses m any manner.5. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail applications stand disposedof.
6. It is clarified that this order shall not tantamount to expression—of any opinion on the merits of the case.
CHANDEKi^SMKHAR, J
AUGUST 07,2019/rk