Neeraj Kumar v. State (NCT Of Delhi)

$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 2006/2020 NEERAJ KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr Ravi Shankar, Advocate.

versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through:

Mr Ravi Nayak, APP for State with Inspector Ravi, PS Nand Nagri.

Mr Pradeep Teotia, Advocate for complainant.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 19.08.2020 [Hearing held through video conferencing] 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, seeking interim bail for a period of 45 days in connection with FIR No.0328/2015 under Sections 302/307/34 of the IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959 registered with PS Nand Nagri.

2.

The petitioner seeks interim bail on the ground that his wife is suffering from various ailments and requires to be treated. It is stated that she is suffering from mental disability and there is nobody to look after. In addition, the petitioner states that she does not have the necessary funds for her medical treatment.

3.

A status report has been filed, which indicates that the medical documents provided by the petitioner have been verified. The said Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL Location:

22:40:14

document is from the Institute of Mental Health and Hospital at Agra. It is confirmed that the petitioner's wife had visited the said hospital for her treatment on one occasion but had not followed up her treatment. At the material time, she was residing with her mother. 4.

The status report also indicates that her residential address in Delhi was verified and it was found that she was living there with her children and the petitioner's cousins. It is stated that the brothers of the petitioner also reside in the same locality. The present petition has been moved by the petitioner's parokar, who is his brother's wife. It is stated that the other relatives also live nearby the residence of the petitioner. Inquiries were also made from the neighbours and they had confirmed that two of the petitioner's nephews also reside with her. It is apparent that there are number of relatives to look after the petitioner's wife and it is not necessary that the petitioner be released for the said purpose. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

5.

It is clarified the present petition is being dismissed solely on the ground in which the interim bail is sought for is not persuasive and would not preclude the petitioner from seeking regular bail. VIBHU BAKHRU, J AUGUST 19, 2020 MK Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL Location:

22:40:14