Karishma @ Priya v. State (NCT Of Delhi)
$~A-8 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 995/2020 KARISHMA @ PRIYA ... Petitioner Through Mr.Joginder Tulli, Adv.
versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ... Respondent Through Mr.Mukesh Kumar, APP for State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
O R D E R
% 25.06.2020 1.
This hearing is conducted through video conferencing. 2.
This interim bail application is filed under section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking interim bail in FIR No.148/2017 registered under sections 365/392/34 IPC read with sections 25/27/54 of the Arms Act at P.S. Crime Branch, for a period of 45 days.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to ongoing pandemic for the safety of the petitioner, she may be released on interim bail. It is also pleaded that she needs to take care of her minor son aged 10 years and senior citizen parents. It is also stated that she fulfils the criteria laid down by the High Powered Committee.
4.
Learned counsel for the respondent has strongly opposed the present petition. He has pointed out that a status report has been filed where it is stated that the petitioner was the main conspirator behind the dacoity/bit coins.
5.
A perusal of the status report filed by the respondent shows that the petitioner has a son who is studying in 6th Standard and is living with his
maternal grandparents (Nani & Nani). The Nana is 63 year old retired government officer and is receiving an appropriate pension. The report also states that the father of the petitioner has boycotted her since 2005 and they do not maintain any relations since then.
6.
The report interestingly also mentions that the other co-accused, namely, Devender Chauhan, Kuldeep, Karambir, Kunal Sharma, Sandeep and Yashasvi Sharma were granted interim bails on various grounds relating to the family or illness.
7.
I cannot help noticing that though the report gives different reasons as to why the co-accused have been granted interim bails, the fact is that all the co-accused have been granted interim bails.
Further keeping in view the present pandemic, it would be interest of justice that the petitioner is granted the same relief.
8.
Accordingly, the petitioner is granted interim bail for 30 days from the date of her release, on her furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Jail Superintendent, subject to following conditions: (i) She will provide her mobile number to the SHO, P.S. Crime Branch, which shall be kept in working condition at all times and shall not be changed;
(ii) She is directed to mark her presence before the SHO, P.S. Crime Branch every Monday through her mobile phone; (iii) She will not leave the jurisdiction of the National Capital Territory of Delhi or Dehradun without prior permission of the concerned court;
(iv) She shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promises to any witness during the investigation or trial or tamper with the evidence; and (v) She shall duly surrender at the end of the suspension period. 9.
A copy of this order be sent by the Registry by e-mail to the concerned Jail Superintendent for information and necessary compliance. 10.
With the above directions, the petition is disposed of. JAYANT NATH, J.
JUNE 25, 2020/v