Manjot Singh v. The State Of NCT Of Delhi
$~4 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN.887/2020 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 6255/2020 MANJOT SINGH .....Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Abhijat and Mr.Kapil Lalwani, Advocates.
versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Represented by: Mr.Ashok K.Garg, APP for the State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 14.05.2020 1.
The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing. 2.
By this application, petitioner seeks interim bail in case FIR No.30/2018 under Sections 302/201/120B IPC registered at PS Malviya Nagar, Delhi. 3.
On the last date itself, that is, 12th May, 2020 learned counsel for the petitioner stated that though he had filed Bail Appln. No.887/2020 for regular bail but he would be pressing the applications for interim bail only on the ground that the surgery of the petitioner's mother is fixed for 13th, 14th and 15th May, 2020. 4.
A perusal of the medical documents of the petitioner's mother which have been placed on record along with the petition show that the petitioner's mother Smt. Prakash Kaur, aged 74 years had gone to Cronus Multi Specialty Hospital on 4th May, 2020 with severe abdomen pain, nausea and vomiting however, after examination she was advised medicines and was discharged. She was advised review with the reports. However, on 5th May, 2020 another medical document of the mother has been prepared stating that the patient came in emergency on 4th May, 2020 with complaint of severe abdomen pain, nausea and vomiting and on BAIL APPLN.887/2020
seeing the reports surgery was planned through Laproscopy or open on 13th, 14th and 15th May, 2020 and two days prior thereto COVID-19 test was required to be done.
5.
Status report filed by the state verifies the documents to be correct however, as per the status report, family of the petitioner comprises of his wife and three sons, one of whom is a special child and is with his wife. The other two sons of the petitioner are married, one living in Jalandhar and the other living with his family in Delhi. According to the report, the patient will be admitted on the day of surgery and will be discharged on the next day itself. 6.
Considering the fact that the allegations in the FIR in question are serious to the extent that the petitioner and co-accused have used a minor child in the commission of the offence and that the surgery of the petitioner's mother can be taken care of by the petitioner's wife and one son who is residing in Delhi and is not a serious emergent surgery as is evident from the documents, this Court finds no ground to grant interim bail to the petitioner at this stage. 7.
Applications are dismissed.
8.
Order be uploaded on the website of the Court. MUKTA GUPTA, J.
MAY 14, 2020 'vn'
BAIL APPLN.887/2020