Sandeep v. State

$~A-19 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 1133/2020 SANDEEP ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Pawan Reley, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr.Mukesh Kumar, APP for State.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH

O R D E R

% 23.07.2020 1.

This hearing is conducted through video-conferencing. 2.

This bail application is filed under section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in FIR No.232/2019 registered under sections 392/394/397/120B/34 IPC at P.S. Pandav Nagar, Delhi. 3.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he confines his relief to grant of interim bail on account of the medical condition of the father of the petitioner and the fact that he has two small daughters including one of whom is six months old. It is also prayed that on account of the present Covid-19 pandemic, it would be in the interest of justice to grant interim bail to the petitioner. 4.

Status report has been filed by the respondent. It shows that on 02.07.2020 a complaint regarding robbery was received at Police Station Pandav Nagar, Delhi. It is stated in the complaint by the complainant that he was travelling with a bag containing Rs.3.50 lakhs on his bike. While passing through Gate No.2 of Supreme Enclave, two accused person snatched the bag from him and gave a blow on his forehead with a katta like

object. As per the plan of co-accused, it was the Mukesh and Shubham who chased the complainant. The petitioner Sandeep was involved in planning the crime. He was called on the phone many times by Shubham. As per the CDR records, accused Sandeep and accused Shubham have exchanged number of calls including on 01.07.2019 that is the day before the incident and on 02.07.2019 two calls were made by accused Shubham to the phone of Sandeep at 3.04 p.m., which was just after the robbery. 5.

The status report also states that FIRs have been registered in Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. against the petitioner.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was arrested on 17.07.2019. He also states that the SIM in question was not registered in his name but in his brother's name. He further states that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He further states that the petitioner is on bail in all other false cases. 7.

However, relief has been confined to interim bail. Keeping in view the present Covid-19 pandemic and the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has two small daughters and the issue of medical conditions of his father, it would be in the interest of justice that he is granted interim bail for a period of three weeks. 8.

Accordingly, the petitioner is granted interim bail for a period of three weeks from the date of his release on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent/Duty Magistrate, subject to following conditions: (i) He will provide his current mobile phone number to the IO/SHO, P.S. Pandav Nagar, Delhi and will ensure that the phone number remains active.

(ii) He will report physically every Monday at 10:00 a.m. to the IO (Sub Inspector Rahul Singh), P.S. Pandav Nagar, Delhi. (iii) He will not in any manner seek to tamper with the evidence or threaten or contact in any manner the prosecution witnesses. (iv) He will not leave the jurisdiction of the National Capital Territory of Delhi without prior permission of the concerned court.

(v) He will 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 Jail Superintendent, Tihar for information and necessary compliance. 10.

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of. JAYANT NATH, J.

JULY 23, 2020/v