Anil Kumar v. State

$~40 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2783/2019 ANIL KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through Mr Saurabh Soni, Ms Mannat Singh, Advocates.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr R.S. Kundu, ASC for State with Mr shivam Sharan, Advocate for State.

SI Kekar, P.S. Domestic Airport.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 21.01.2020 CRL.M.A. 1297/2020 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application is disposed of.

CRL.M.A. 1296/2020 3.

The petitioner has filed the present application, inter alia, praying that the order dated 12.12.2019 be modified to reduce the personal bond amount and the stipulation of providing two sureties. 4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/applicant submits that the applicant barely earns ₹3000/- per month and is also not able to arrange two sureties. He states that his mother is willing to stand as a surety but can furnish a bond only in the sum of ₹5000/-.

5.

In view of the averments made in the application, the same is allowed. Accordingly, paragraph five of the said order dated 12.12.2019 is modified to read as under: - "5. Status report has been filed, which indicates that the petitioner's address has been verified. In view of the above, the respondent is directed to release the petitioner on parole for a period of four weeks from the date of his release. This is subject to the petitioner furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹5,000/-, with one surety of the equivalent amount to the satisfaction of the Jail superintendent. The petitioner shall also ensure that he shall not leave the National Capital Territory of Delhi. He shall also provide his mobile number and ensure that he is reachable at all times. The sureties of the petitioner shall also provide their mobile numbers and be reachable at all times."

VIBHU BAKHRU, J JANUARY 21, 2020 pkv